 |
| Silverfiddle Rant! |
Go Yahoogle "Steve King racist statements" and you will be fed a plethora of articles containing characterizations of what he said, and quote snippets shorn of the contextual conversation surrounding it.
The latest comes from the New York Times claiming he lamented the demonization of the terms "white nationalist" and "white supremacist." The New York Times is withholding the complete context from us. Here's is King's explanation:
In a 56 minute interview, we discussed the changing use of language in political discourse. We discussed the worn out label “racist” and my observation that other slanderous labels have been increasingly assigned to Conservatives by the Left, who injected into our current political dialog such terms as Nazi, Fascist, ‘White Nationalist, White Supremacist,— Western Civilization, how did THAT language become offensive?
Why did I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?’…just to watch Western Civilization become a derogatory term in political discourse today. Clearly, I was only referencing Western Civilization classes. No one ever sat in a class listening to the merits of white nationalism and white supremacy.
Who's right? Rep King or the New York Times Journolist? The Times needs to release the complete recording of the interview and let us judge for ourselves.
Here are more items in the "Steve King is a Racist" rolodex:
This retweet got him branded an anti-Semite. So I guess anyone quoting Marx, Mao or Gorbachev is a communist... Go figure...
This Gert Wilders retweet marks king as a dangerous white nationalist...
In 2017, King tweeted that he agreed with far-right Dutch politician Geert Wilders that "our civilization" cannot be restored "with somebody else's babies."Yes, The United States has a civilization, and it is ours. It is distinct from other nations. It is a beautiful mosaic that was built by and is now enjoyed by people of all races, religions and national origins. We were a melting pot once, where "somebody else" from "somewhere else" became "one of us," including my mom, her sister and her parents. If we don't breed, our culture will die, and other will move in with their own culture and remake the social landscape. It is not bigoted or hateful to oppose that.
Will the dirty old Muslim men bringing in child brides allow them to assimilate? Are the 20% of the population that do not speak English at home interested in assimilation?
But I digress...
Rep King is guilty of speaking candidly and using politically-incorrect language. People calling him a racist have not made their case. Most frighteningly, whole herds of educated sheeple are condemning him based upon propaganda and smears. No one has actually formulated a logical argument for the case that Rep. King is a racist.
This is a deliberate tightening of the language, a narrowing of acceptable speech. The left can cheer "old white people" dying off, but no can criticize unregulated immigration or call a shithole a shithole. See how the game is played? The left holds all the weapons and enjoys a free fire zone, while screaming bloody murder any time someone to their right picks up a pea-shooter.
Please read this infamous interview Rep King had with an Austrian news site that once had a Nazi in its management 70 years ago. Here are a few shocking, reprehensible quotes:
Freedom of speech, religion and press, property rights, Judeo-Christian values, all these things that are so important.hmmm.... a neo-nazi anti-Semite lauding our "Judeo-Christian" values... Don't hear that too often nowadays.
Look, I can envision generations from now, centuries from now, where everyone eventually starts to look the same, if we get enough intermarriage which is the most effective form of assimilation. […] I don't see Caucasians to be genetically dominant. Blue eyes and blond hair are recessive. So I envision more and more assimilation, and that's positive, and one day, we will all look substantially the same.When asked if he were a civic nationalist or an ethnic nationalist...
I guess “civic” may be able to describe what I am, yes. I'm not an ethnic nationalist. because I look at all these people and I just see the diversity of skin colors.The article disappoints in its lack of inflammatory racist diatribes, especially since it was a white nationalist neo-nazi bigoted anti-Semite being interviewed by a European nazi website. You'd think he really would have let his freak flag fly...
So, can someone make a rational, cogent argument that Rep Steve King is a bigot? Please don't cite how Republicans have repudiated him. That's not an argument, and anyway, Republicans are running scared trying to hold up their crapped-full adult diapers.
"The sleep of reason produces monsters"
-- Francisco Goya
More Reading: A brief guide to Rep. Steve King's 'long history of racist statements'
Good post!
ReplyDeleteWords have meanings, and their use has a purpose. It helps to propel the leftist narrative when most Americans do not know what words mean, either in their correct definition or in the context in which they are employed. The word racism, for example, denotes a belief that differences in human character or ability produce some races that are superior to others. Are we racists if we simply do not embrace certain aspects of a particular culture? Suppose I abhor a certain genre of music that just happens to have originated in Kazak culture ... does this make me a racist? Replace the word Kazak with any other ethnicity, would any of those substitutions make me a racist?
How about attaching the suffix -phobia ... which is described as having a persistent, abnormal, or an irrational fear or aversion to a specific thing, or a situation that compels one to avoid it. The key here being the words “abnormal and irrational.” Just because I choose not to hang out in gay bars does not make me a homophobe, nor does the opinion that homosexual behaviors pose a substantial health risk to those who practice them. Moreover, being situationally aware when in the presence of Muslims does not make me an Islamophobic, since situational awareness is a rational safeguard within an ethnic structure that exceeds 350-million extremists. Finally, given the number of murders, rapes, robberies, burglaries, and injuries caused by illegal aliens, it is not unreasonable for the law-abiding citizen to fear of these criminals.
So we ought to know what words mean before we try to use them in sentences. Calling people racist because they happen to believe in nationalism is no more than a leftist ploy designed to shut down meaningful conversation.
James Watson was recently stripped of scientific awards because of a comment he made about intelligence ... good reporting at Bunkerville. How dare a scientist initiate a discussion about genetics when trying to understand human intelligence. Someone asked, should a politically correct (meaning idiotic) narrative stand in the way of scientific inquiry?
One more question: what is reason? It is the rational basis for an argument or action. Leftists discarded reason a long time ago. All that remains is a list of words sorted randomly that they don’t know the meaning of ...
Leftists are forever trying to alter the meaning of words we've known all our lives, because it gives them a tactical advantage in their ceaseless quest to besmirch, undermine and destroy our cultural norms and values, our understanding of history, and our basic undersanding of right and wrong.
DeleteThey do this too by creating a whole new, ever-growing list of TABOOS for the express purpose of tripping us up, and shamng us on or own turf in order to seize control, and ultimately TYRANNIZE us.
By fomenting confusion, suspicion, resentment, and eternal dissension, which tends always to divide US leftists craftily weaken our sense of identity, weaken our resolve to defend ourselves, make us start to doubt ourselves, scorn ourselves, fight amongst ourselves, and thus make inroads into OUR power structure, –– NEVER to help STRENGTHEN IT –– but to upend it, stomp all over it, defecate upon it, and ultimately DESTROY it from within.
Sam,
DeleteCalling people racist because they happen to believe in nationalism is no more than a leftist ploy designed to shut down meaningful conversation.
Shutting down the conversation is the objective.
There seems to be an avoidance here that maybe advocating white supremacy as not such a bad thing isn't such a bad thing.
Delete@ Jones ... advocating anything is not a crime. We may disagree about someone's point of view, but they must be allowed to express it.
DeleteSam
AJ, Your inability to substantiate your assertion proves my point: The left is incapable of making a logical argument. IN fact, you haven't even provided any examples.
DeleteSam, I never stated or implied that expressions which embrace white supremacy is a crime. But it is by diffinition, blatant racism.
DeleteNow you can tap dance around that part and focus squarely on Western Civilization but an advocation of white supremacy is still in King's statement.
There seems to be an argument here on considering the context of King's statement (and history) to determine if its racist. We need to come to terms with the reality that the concept along with open statements that one race is superior to another race is racism, not a point of view. How to deal with people of different levels who openly express racism is a point of view.
King says he was misquoted, and his explanation makes sense. He calls those racist terms "slanderous labels." It makes no sense that in the next breath he would embrace them.
DeleteLet me help you: Go find any other quotes where he states he is a white nationalist or white supremacist.
Did he make the statement on purpose to the NY Times reporter (Loud and proud)? or did he make an oopsie, slipping up and telling the reporter what he really thought?
If you're going to assemble a coherent argument, you have to address those questions.
SF, asking me to pull up King's comment history to confirm his racism is akin to asking someone to prove Trump is a liar.
DeleteBut for funnies, okay, this was the first time in all of history that Rep Steve King ever said anything that could remotely be construed as racism. There are no other examples in existence. You really got me.
I don't buy into the tongue slip. And if you do, it's obviously an unwinnable argument. Looks like you got me again.
Glad I could help you.
DeleteYou don't need his whole comment history, you just need one quote where he states he is a proud white supremacist.
Proud? Kinda moved the goal post a tad didn't ya? And only if he actually said he was a proud white supremacist rather than obvious dog whistles?
DeleteWhy not add, "while standing under a cypress tree"?
OK, provide any quote where he says he's a white supremacist.
DeleteWe'll wait...
None. I guess that means you outwitted me again you crafty devil.
DeleteI looked for quotes from Hitler and came up short again. I even come to learn that most racist don't even know they're racist at all. Getting a racist to actually admit he/she is a racist or, white supremacist if you prefer, seems to be a rather tall order.
If I might ask, what precisely is your point?
Mine? Thanks for asking. You just can't have a rationale argument about racism when one refuses to acknowledge its existence. You know, a misinterpretation of their context or maybe a slip of the tongue or such, maybe even not having an actual sign on their Congressional office door stating such.
White supremacy is racism. I hope you at least agree with that.
Of course racism exists--white supremacy is one flavor--and a little yahoogling can yield a depressing overabundance of racist rantings and quotes.
DeleteUnfortunately for you and your fellow Maoists, you can't find any from Rep King.
Maoist? You impute opinions of me that I do not have, or you could not know I have as I've never expressed such verbally or in my writings, something from your very own argument is a requirement.
DeleteAgain, we are obviously at a standstill on the issue as you seem content with taking King's alibi of misinterpretation. I don't. Your insistence on redundancy is unclear.
We're not at a standstill. You cannot substantiate your unfounded accusation that Rep Steve King is a racist.
DeleteYou should be ashamed of yourself, slinging around wild accusations and slandering people. If this were a court of law, where people who hurl accusations had to back them up, you would lose. Badly.
You fooled me SF. I actually thought your intent was constructive dialogue.
DeleteYour premise of proven written admission or otherwise exoneration is nonsensical but, I suspect you know that. I suspect you also know you have slung around unfounded accusations of me but once called out for it, twirl into sophomoric spin.
Those masters of the universe tend to do such, like once your argument fails to stand to scrutiny, simply create a new one out of thin air only to claim victory to your new fabrication, all while dismissing your opponent in contempt.
Hypocrisy, intellectual laziness, and intellectual dishonesty seems to be the long suit of today's so-called conservatives.
What you have is an opinion, and you are entitled to it. If people are going to accuse others of something as serious as racism, they better have some damn good proof, which you do not have.
DeleteThere goes that goal post again. Only in cases of severity such as racism are accusations scrutinized. Maoist? Even without even a clue? Fair game! But of course, you hold the rule book.
DeleteHow bout a pedophile? That sounds serious enough for me. If one has never acknowledged it, is he in the clear? Seemed to have been the case in Atlanta. Putin interference? Well, if he said he didn't then that's pretty much that. Rape and molestation? Well, "he told me he didn't so that's good enough for me".
Kinda sad what the Trump bowel dwellers have morphed into.
Thing is, the Trump protectors wouldn't even accept actual admission of King et al even if such was produced. They'd deny it with something like "yeah, well, he said he didn't mean it so that sounds reasonable to me". Now I'm not saying you personally would ever stoop to such,,,,,,,,oh, wait a minute. You did.
You're flailing in your own slobbery pool of hypotheticals. An accuser bears the burden of proof.
DeleteAre you going to make a logical case that Rep King is a racist, or not? So far, not.
Keep going. I'm going to use this exchange for a future blog post on the pathetic reasoning of doctrinaire leftwing hive dwellers.
You again make an accusation you cannot validate. You are obviously so bigoted (not to be confused with racist) that you automatically assume if one challenges the pathetic slime that the party of Trump has evolved into, that person must be a left wing hive dweller or, or, or something.
DeleteAnd it's likely that bigotry you harbor that forbids you to accept any concept of any argument I present. So of course I've fail to offer you anything. There's no way you'd allow anything from anyone you deem leftist to enter your cocoon.
You were making an argument? Let me try to help you again. You need to proffer some comment or act that would support your assertion (so far, unfounded) that Rep King is a racist.
DeleteYour objective of toying and defecting is obvious. But being a sport, playing along has its humor.
DeleteI'd say debunking your argument would be more accurate. Now, I realize you may not see that but one never will as long as they refuse to look.
@ AJ Jones,
DeleteYou haven't been "debunking" anything. Just admit it, you have no evidence, just your feelings.
Your passive aggressive discourse has become boring. Piss me off and "I'll" delete your comments, Silverfiddle shouldn't put up with your BS.
Warren,
DeleteYou can close the thread if you want, I'm bored with this one. This was a useful exercise to demonstrate how the left has become stupefied by the constant parroting and repetition of their emotional feelings by the Infotainment Media Complex.
They have been stroking and affirming each other and rejoicing that the pop culture media is on their side they have become intellectually flabby. When is the last time anyone on the left had to actually substantiate one of their absurd pronouncements?
Warren, to save you the trouble, if my comments aren't welcome, I'll gladly show myself to the door.
DeleteI'm not sure what you're reading but SF is basically saying is 1) King says his racist comments weren't what he meant so therefore he's in the clear and 2) unless there are documents of King actually admitting his racism he isn't racist. Both are inductive as well as nonsensical.
Of course it has gotten boring. I just wanted to see how far in his,,,,well, I'd like to say hypocrisy and dishonesty but I don't really know if that's accurate. I've come to realize Trump has become somewhat of a false idol god to many so called conservatives and liberals as well. And all they can do is bowel to him so long as he continues spewing God, guns, and gays and that the Mexicans are coming. And as long as he keeps waving that Confederate flag and chanting Make America White Again, his followers will believe and trust anything he says or does even if it's protecting rabid racist, pedophiles, vagina grabbers, Putin, Kim Jong Um, exploding the deficit, profiteering, or whatever.
When did these thing become the conservative way and what part of denouncing them make someone "leftist" or "Maoist"?
...and you still have not marshalled a coherent argument to make you case Rep King is a racist. Not one shred of evidence, not one fact, not one quote.
DeleteInstead you blather on about President Trump waving confederate flags LOL!
See, you've proven my point. Smear and innuendo are all you have, because Rep King has never said one race is superior to another.
You and your ilk should be ashamed of yourselves.
I think SF, from your very own statement, "I'm bored with this one", we're done. My last comment was explicitly addressed to Warren, not you. Conversing with you and your incoherent and non sequiturs is akin to trying to teach advanced calculus to a trash can or perhaps an overflowing toilet, something incapable of reason while spewing sewage.
DeleteCan you even define incoherent? Do you know what a non-sequitur is?
DeleteCan you point out anywhere in this post or this thread where I been incoherent or engaged in non-sequitur?
Your inability to logically substantiate your propaganda-fueled feelings is not my problem.
I issued a challenge with the blog post, and you dithered and blathered and didn't even get close to answering it.
Funny, if someone is an incoherent overflowing toilet, it should be easy to concisely dismantle their argument. You may want to grab that plunger and do a little self-reflection.
You have embarrassed yourself.
You asked for a King quote which he admits racism.
DeleteI responded yesterday at 6:28pm that I had none. You've repeatedly come back with the same question. I mean, tap tap, is this thing on?
Your premise is that an admission is needed in order for one to racist which defies reasoning.
You defy your own logic by calling me a Maoist without my admission or any evidence and then refuse to explain that justification. You do the same with a leftist insinuation.
You even made claims that I have called King a racist (my "unfounded accusations" you say) which I have not albeit I did say I didn't buy his excuse of misrepresentation.
I asked you if this same lack of admission exonerated others and you failed to answer.
You even state that you are bored with this yet keep coming back asking the same question of an oral admission from King which I told you yesterday didn't exist.
I did point to this very latest statement from King questioning how white supremacy became offensive and you ignored it.
If such oral admission did exist (I think I touched on this and you ignored), wouldn't that be void with a simple aditional claim of misinterpretation.
Much of this you have ignored or refused to answer. Yet, you come back to me with an insistence of answering you.
Yeah right, how embarrassing!
Okay, I'll assume the device you use doesn't allow scrolling back to yesterday at 6:28 PM where I acknowledged the unlikeliest of finding some statement where King openly admitted being racist.
DeleteFranco,
ReplyDeleteI have a problem with collective guilt -- particularly when the guilt is supposed to hearken back to something that happened a century earlier. We do not choose our ancestors; neither are we responsible for what our ancestors did.
In case anyone missed this:
ReplyDeleteThe No. 3 House Republican is suggesting that Rep. Steve King leave Congress over his remarks about white supremacy.
Wyoming Republican Liz Cheney on Tuesday said of King, “I think he should find another line of work.”.
Virtue signaling.
Pfffffft.
In a 56 minute interview, we discussed the changing use of language in political discourse. We discussed the worn out label “racist” and my observation that other slanderous labels have been increasingly assigned to Conservatives by the Left, who injected into our current political dialog such terms as Nazi, Fascist, White Nationalist, White Supremacist, — Western Civilization, how did THAT language become offensive?
ReplyDelete"How did the term 'Western Civilization' become an insult akin to NAZI and White Nationalist?" is what I take the context of his question to mean.
Do you ever have a relevant point? He’s more than a little suspect of what, exactly? Someone with an opinion different from your own? So okay, you don’t share his “fondness for the Confederate flag,” ... maybe he doesn’t share your fondness for the Hammer and Sickle and all it represents. Surely he cannot be “more racist” than the entire Democratic Party since its inception.
ReplyDeleteI would expect you might see some issues with conflating white suprematism with western civilization.
ReplyDeleteThe confederate battle flag maybe not so much.
lol! What about the Young Patriots Organization? They were White Supremacists allied with the Black Panthers?
ReplyDeleteHow far we've come in 50 short years...
Oh, THAT's right, the battle flag became racist AFTER Nixon's imagined "Southern Strategy" purged all confederate symbols from the Democrat Party.... and transferred them to the Republicans.
ReplyDeleteHow soon they forget!
ReplyDeleteThe sixties were the last time the White working class was classified as fellow proles... they became members of the capitalist class (masters/oppressors) from that day forward.
ReplyDeleteMuch has changed. Farmer. At least early on, the Black Panthers put focus on poverty as proof of the failures of the capitalist system. By the early 1970s, some unity had been built between the black community and many poor and working class white people. Then came Reagan in the ’80s ...
ReplyDeleteDucky's here:
ReplyDeleteYou overlook the obvious.
King talks of how "slanderous labels have been increasingly assigned to Conservatives by the Left, who injected into our current political dialog such terms as Nazi, Fascist, White Nationalist, White Supremacist..."
(Verbal pause)
"Western Civilization, how did THAT language become offensive?"
As the author of this piece demands, the Old Gray Lady needs to hand over the unedited tapes so we can hear it for ourselves without the leftwing filter.
Do you really believe a closet racist would extol the virtues of white supremacy to a NY Times reporter?
I'm surprised King hasn't slipped up and barked out a "HEIL HITLER!" during one of his interviews. You exemplify a common sickness of the left: Brain rot. Successive generations of socialist stranglehold of our public schools have robbed good citizens of their independent thinking and powers of reasoning.
Though I find it odd for an Iowan to proudly display the Battle Flag of the Army of Northern Virginia on his desk...and he has had some sketchy affiliations........I didn't find anything troubling in his most recent comments.
ReplyDeleteIf anything, in an educated society, it would have sparked serious discussion about who we are [and who we want to be] as a people. But the Right has long surrendered any ground held in the [and I loath this term] "culture war".
I've long held that had the Right owned freedom of speech, expression and civil liberties.....it would be the dominant force in today's political landscape.
CI,
DeleteI've long held that had the Right owned freedom of speech, expression and civil liberties.....it would be the dominant force in today's political landscape.
Is there any way for the Right to regain footing and get on solid ground?
Can't add anything to what SF adroitly stated.
DeleteMaybe you can explain how right wing opposition to gay marriage (a civil institution) is consistent with the supposed advocacy for civil liberty.
DeleteThe gay marriage fight is lost and the republic is still here.
You didn’t understand that SF was saying that very inconsistency.....and how it damaged the Republican brand?
DeleteSilver said... "the snotty right has been a pack of sanctimonious pricks huffing their own gas, delivering sterile economic lectures to the working poor, and calling everyone to their left un-American atheists."
DeleteWise words Silver... and there is equal BS coming from the left. In fact with just a few changes, your statement could apply to the "sanctimonious pricks" on the left too. It's refreshing to see at least some conservatives step up and place some of the problems we have on the right.
It gives me hope that there is a way forward.
Dave, thank you, and I wish I could share your optimism. See my comments below.
DeleteThorvald,
ReplyDeleteAs the author of this piece demands, the Old Gray Lady needs to hand over the unedited tapes so we can hear it for ourselves without the leftwing filter.
Yes, indeed.
But the NYT will not do that.
"I've long held that had the Right owned freedom of speech, expression and civil liberties"
ReplyDeleteActually, traditionally, the left has owned those issues and heroically fought for them. It is thanks to the left that the government can no longer break down a gay couple's front door and drag them off to jail for the crime of sodomy. I'm not into that myself, but I don't like government criminalizing private behavior of consenting adults.
The most frightening development is the left's abandonment of free speech and live-and-let-live personal liberty.
Face it: Democrats and Republicans are two warring factions fighting over who gets to be the dictator.
Partially. In my head at least.....and I should have been more clear....for me, civil liberties also encompasses the rights to property, defense of the same and of self, and the ability to reasonably keep the fruits of ones own labor....and the right to dispense such [or not] at will. Those ideals, I have typically associated with the Right.
DeleteIn the cases of both parties....the long-cherished ideals have been cast aside.
I agree. Gun ownership is severely restricted in progressive-rule enclaves.
DeleteSilver... my son leans left. No surprise there. And he lives in CA. He will tell you that he has plenty of plenty of leftist friends who, as you mentioned, have no need for free speech unless they agree with what is being said.
DeleteAnd then, if asked, he'd tell you about not getting a job because as a child of a white guy and a black woman, he not black enough for the extreme left.
It's a mess...
"Face it: Democrats and Republicans are two warring factions fighting over who gets to be the dictator."
DeleteBravo Sir, well said.
Finntann,
DeleteHello! Good to see you here.
Conservatives are supposed to conserve, be the bastion of tradition, morality, cultural preservation, prudence and fiscal responsibility.
ReplyDeleteLiberals are supposed to be pushing the boundaries, opening new doors, advocating for new ways.
If one or the other got their way 100%, we would be in a leftwing or rightwing hell; but in a healthy political environment, a reasonable synthesis emerges: Prudent growth, lifting of outdated strictures, and a healthy society.
What we have instead is a toxic sewer of incoherence, eradication of consequence, and studied ignorance of facts on the ground and reality. This cannot go on indefinitely.
For once I'm in agreement. And, the ONLY way out is, are you ready? Compromise that can only occur through HONEST and SINCERE negotiations. IE: By creating the win-win. It takes honesty and sometimes DAMN hard work.
DeleteI enjoyed the post. On King we disagree. I love the way you framed the issue Silver and your arguments are well phrased and effective. Even convincing, if one allows them to be.
Bottom line for me? I'm thankful he is not my representative. Given his many statements on record I could never vote for him, nor would I if he lived in my state.
Final note, you know what they say about opinions and a-holes, right? Everybody has one,
Straw Poll - Which party, Democratic or Republican is to blame for the US Government Shutdown?
ReplyDeletehttps://commoncts.blogspot.com/2019/01/straw-poll-which-party-democratic-or.html
Republicans
DeleteDemocrats.
DeleteWell, one entity had two years of permissive legislative environment, was offered upwards of five times what he’s asking for currently, specifically stated that Mexico was going to pay for it…..and explicitly took full credit/blame for the shutdown.
DeleteSeems prettty clear.......
Republicans caused the shutdown. Democrats are responsible for keeping it going (refusing to compromise ANY).
DeleteAmericans have long-engaged in a search for their way in what is often mislabeled a democratic society. We are no more democratic in our views about government and society than we were in the late 1600s. We have sought, for example, to rule ourselves through the majority opinion, but realized early on that a majority can be every bit as tyrannical as a ruling monarchy. We concluded that the rights of the minority must be taken into account. Over time, as our population increased, we found ourselves confronted with a wide range of “minority” views. So many, in fact, that we’ve had to develop a new definition for them: special interests, political action groups, agenda-driven interests —and so the amazing thing is how so many people, with so many divergent views, ever agree on anything. Our present political spectrum closely resembles a human history timeline.
ReplyDeleteThe nature of this beast is, I think, that given our present circumstances (i.e., large populations and so many points of view) that government has taken over all “we the people” aspects of self-government. Our ability as citizens to direct government, or so it seems to me, is extremely limited —that being, to vote every two years. Beyond writing to our representatives (which must not be confused with delegates), there is nothing else for us to do except to participate in inane demonstrations that receive no more than five minutes of attention from the press—and spout off on various forms of social media that, in the final analysis, no one gives a damn about.
None of the above intends to suggest that even in spite of our many disagreements there is not some things we can agree on. Reading comments, it appears that we all agree that we cannot trust any government (local, state, federal) to do the right thing on behalf of “we the people,” —ever. Maybe what we ought to be thinking about is spending far more time with those whom we love, our closest friends, eat good food, enjoy a great cocktail, take in a film, read a good book, and not worry ourselves into an early grave fretting about things we cannot control. It seems to me that the worst thing would be to reach the end of our lives and regret that we did not spend sufficient time with the really-important things in life.
@ Sam: "Maybe what we ought to be thinking about is spending far more time with those whom we love, our closest friends, eat good food, enjoy a great cocktail, take in a film, read a good book, and not worry ourselves into an early grave
DeleteWise words, and that is what I concluded and now focus on. Too many good things in my life to obsess over this, and I gave up defending Republican and the "religious right" years ago because although I live my own life in a conservative manner and try to practice an orthodox Christianity, I can't stand activist "conservatives" and feckless Republicans.
So, if I step out in the public square to make a point, it is almost always on some principle and almost never a partisan argument.
I find myself making more effort to enjoy life by reading more books -- and less of the web. Call it "sanity preservation"!
DeleteMaybe I should change my name to "Sometimes On Watch," but I don't like what those initials spell. Heh.
Sam,
DeleteIt seems to me that the worst thing would be to reach the end of our lives and regret that we did not spend sufficient time with the really-important things in life.
I must agree. We must divorce ourselves from addiction to politics and sociology.
GET READY FOR Caravan number 3, because it has already begun. An estimated 2,000 people, mostly from Honduras have begun their trek through Central America and Mexico towards the US Southern Border where they will demand citizenship. They have been told that US immigration enforcement is overwhelmed and won’t have room to house these people while they wait for their asylum claims to be processed, so they will be let go and given a court date. Most will never be seen again. Unless they commit a crime and get busted, at which point California’s sanctuary city laws will kick in and protect any illegal alien, regardless of the crime they committed. Democrats seem to want to incentivize illegal entry rather than an orderly process which is how our country has always handled immigration. The only thing they’re concerned about is giving themselves any edge they can for the next election
ReplyDeleteAmerica! What a country!
DeleteAll you gotta do is cross the border, surrender and claim asylum, see the judge for your permiso and a court day three years in the future, and Uncle Sucker's taxpayers give you free transportation to the sanctuary city of your choice, where you can join up with the rest of your illegal immigrant family and enjoy all the benefits US citizens enjoy.
We are a stupid and suicidal nation.
Yes, SF, it's suicidal.
DeleteLooking forward to the next pandemic brought into our country via the southern border. Heh.
Are we surprised? A 90 plus Nobel Prize winner scientist by the name of James Watson was thrown under the bus recently.
ReplyDeleteDistinguished scientist and Nobel Prize winner James Watson was stripped of several honorary titles after suggesting our genetic makeup cause differences in IQ tests.
This at the same time that scientists are investigating the "Smart Gene." Speak your mind at your own peril.
Bunkerville,
DeleteI saw that nonsense James Watson. He's being persecuted, IMO.
And I cannot disagree with one of his theses: our genetic makeup cause differences in IQ tests. Surely there is the genetic element. It's not the only element, but it is one of them.
Indeed. But then again, the Western Civ "core curriculum" has somehow become "White Nationalist" and "White Supremecist"... and has been banished from many Universities, only to be replaced with all sorts of varied "ethnic studies" programs. Why isn't THAT considered "racist"?
ReplyDeleteThe Left denigrates it's own heritage so as to "signal" bias recognition and thereby attempt to assume a presumably morally "superior" position in every conversation/dialogue (as culturally neutral/Universal (as in human rights)/one who recognizes the evil of putting one's own cultural biases first).
ReplyDeleteThis is why every conversation with a Leftist eventually comes down to "race" and people like Steve King getting called a "racist" (for NOT denouncing his).
Social capital in human relationships has become paramount. Every conversation must negotiate the social relationship between the conversants... and in the case of Left-Right conversations... the Left "assumes" the "morally superior" one, trumping whatever "truth" the Right might have to offer to it.
ReplyDelete...and in the case of a liberal NY Times correspondent interviewing a conservative legislator... all the reporter is looking for is a moral "gotcha!" to prove the superiority of their own "neutral/ unbiased" position.
ReplyDeleteDucky, the Left has let Identity politics BLUR it's focus. It's high time they got back to the class struggle.
ReplyDelete...because the poor White working class is NOT allied with the Master/Oppressor Corporate Capitalist/Banker class.
ReplyDeleteOf course, you'll have to re-sharpen your "class" arguments to justify letting the world's poor into OUR sovereign nation... cuz the moral one's are falling short.
ReplyDeleteWhite intellectuals on the Left need to stop throwing the White Working class under the bus so that THEY can claim moral superiority for themselves!
ReplyDeleteWell, I see neither Ducky nor Les could answer my challenge to make a case that Rep Steve King is a racist. All they have is smear an innuendo. This was fun.
ReplyDelete