Fundamental Concepts-Ends and Means [WeirdDave]

[So, this actually happened, but I'm writing this here instead of risking a cherished friendship. Oh, I'll make the same points to her, but subtly, over time.]

Dear Gay Friend,

I talked to you today after the president's amnesty announcement. You were upset about him assuming dictatorial powers and bitched about trampling the Constitution. You made some good points, about how our American system of government is a historical anomaly, for most of history all of mankind has been ruled by one form of oligarchy or another, and that this portends the US regressing to the mean. You talked about concentration of power to the few at the expense of the many, and you astutely recognized the giant F.U. Amnesty is to the black community in America. You were smart, profane, witty, spot on, and you understand so much, but here's the thing:

In my mind, you don't have the right to say anything.

I've known you for more than 20 years now. I know that you're a self styled libertarian atheist, and I know why you adopted that philosophy. You're black, gay and the rest of your family is highly religious. I understand how their condemnation of your sexual identity led you to reject their values (I also remember when you came out to them and they did NOT disown you even though you expected that they would). In some ways this is good, they're dyed in the wool Obamaphiles and your libertarian streak inoculated you from that madness. In others though, I think your wholesale, almost frenzied rejection of Christianity leaves you without spiritual grounding and with a curious blind spot towards Christians, whatever you believe Christianity says about your sexuality, Westboro is an extreme aberration, not the norm. In short, you're human, as flawed and as wonderful as any of us, and I love you.

When you bitched and ranted about presidential usurpation of legislative prerogatives, however, I find it hard to take you seriously. It's not that you're wrong, gods no, it's just that I remember you crowing about judicial usurpation of legislative authority on the issue of gay marriage. "We've got 35 states now!" you said triumphantly a few weeks back when the latest ruling was issued. When you talk about how laws must be followed, I remember you cheering when OJ was acquitted, even though you told me privately that you thought he was guilty. "As a woman I should be horrified, but I'm just glad the system didn't take down another black man " was how I believe you put it. "The system" didn't take down OJ, he did it himself, and when that didn't take he had to go and do it again years later. (Personally I thought that the OJ trial was a miscarriage of justice, but also a vindication of the law, the prosecution didn't make their case)

See, your libertarian tendencies, while very real, are frequently superfluous when it's your ox being gored. That's not an accusation, far from it, it's the most human of tendencies. As a conservative, however, my philosophy is rooted in the belief that what makes the US system work is the adherence to the rule of law in all cases. The civil rights movement came about to force southern culture and social mores to conform with the law. You like to claim that gay marriage is a new civil rights movement, but it's not. The civil rights movement was a force to uphold the law, the gay marriage movement seeks to overturn by fiat laws that it doesn't like. It's OK that you don't like the law, and it's fine that you seek to change it. There are democratic methods (referendums) and legislative methods (laws) to do that. What isn't fine is to impose your will on everyone else just because they disagree with you. There are processes to be followed, when those processes are shortcutted, the entire system of rule of law is undermined. This is a perfect contrast. You can't be enthusiastic about fiat rulings when they benefit you and aghast when they harm you. That attitude is what will destroy the entire system. Adherence to the rule of law is the only thing standing between us and anarchy, and anarchy always evolves into totalitarianism. You're on the right track with regards to your political philosophy, but you really need to think it through. I'll leave you with one final thought. All of this should be important to you, personally, because you are a black lesbian. If blind pursuit of short term goals achieves them at the cost of destroying the larger societal structure, and we fall into totalitarianism, what then? Can you name one totalitarian regime in history that has been kind to minorities or homosexuals? I can't think of any. Can you?

Your Friend,

Weirddave

Posted by: Open Blogger at 09:01 AM

Comments

(Jump to bottom of comments)

1 Oh Shite

Posted by: Hitsville at November 22, 2014 08:55 AM (/WmRg)

2 Number 2 again

Posted by: Hitsville at November 22, 2014 08:55 AM (/WmRg)

3 Cry me a river pearl Bailey

Posted by: Hitsville at November 22, 2014 08:55 AM (/WmRg)

4 Ahem,
The Greeks and Romans destroyed themselves, with that same perversion.

Posted by: Hitsville at November 22, 2014 08:56 AM (/WmRg)

5 Good letter.

Yeah, a lot of people think gay marriage and the like is SO much more important than democracy, the consent of the governed, the Constitution and the rule of law.

Posted by: WannabeAnglican at November 22, 2014 08:58 AM (Jxprp)

6 Beautifully written - if we were all communicating our values this well we'd own the culture.

Posted by: Jade Sea at November 22, 2014 09:00 AM (Qgn3C)

7 Posted by: Jade Sea at November 22, 2014 09:00 AM (Qgn3C)

Doubt it. Remember that the recipient still has to read it with care and think critically about the contents.

Plus, for all its persuasive power... he posted it *here*.

Posted by: Secundus, M.D. at November 22, 2014 09:04 AM (9eRfy)

8 Awesome!

Best I've read on this issue yet. I'm waiting for my gay friends and family to start bitching about Obama's illegal over reach. Then I'm gonna lay this on them.

Posted by: TruthinessSeeker at November 22, 2014 09:06 AM (LLOa1)

9 Hypocrisy...how does it work?

Great letter, Weird Dave. I have friends like this, too, and they too fail to realize that when the Statists really do control everything, they'll be just as oppressed as everyone else.

Posted by: Captain Whitebread at November 22, 2014 09:08 AM (Pd9h2)

10 This is going to get out of control. . .
. . it is going to get out of control, and while it may start with ooohhhhhing and aaawwwwing it will end with hand waving and screaming, and it will end badly.

Posted by: Rudolph the Depressed at November 22, 2014 09:09 AM (3vCFu)

11 I posted it here because, as I said, I have no desire to metaphorically punch a lifelong friend in the face. If I presented my arguments here in real time as they play out over the next few weeks or months it would be boring. " OT thread. Today I mentioned Article V to Judy. I got her to read it and I think it made an impression" is a diary, not good blogging.

Posted by: Weirddave at November 22, 2014 09:11 AM (9422s)

12 Oh Gabe! Over here.

Heh.

Add in their support for refusing to defend DOMA and Prop. 8.

But, that last part there is the most important.

However, as I say, "The leftists aren't going to like this new paradise they think they are building at all. And they'll still be blaming people like me and you as they're being lined up against the wall."

Posted by: RoyalOil at November 22, 2014 09:13 AM (VjL9S)

13 Posted by: Weirddave at November 22, 2014 09:11 AM (9422s)

Good morning!

Can you shoot me an e-mail to nynjmeet at optimum dot net

I lost a bunch of addresses in a PC crash (both back-ups failed partially).

Thanks.
CBD

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 09:14 AM (Zu3d9)

14 To be fair, the progressive totalitarian regime will be kind to gays and other favored interest groups... as long as they don't criticize the regime or start businesses or anything.

Posted by: W.C. Varones at November 22, 2014 09:17 AM (QNONi)

15 Excuse me - exactly what kind of libertarian is in favor of big government? That is like Conservative Christians for mandatory post birth abortion. What ever the subject of this letter is - and confused is a good starting point - that person is not a libertarian. Perhaps the word Libertine is more accurate.

Posted by: An Observation at November 22, 2014 09:18 AM (ylhEn)

16 This letter with its conclusions contain the essence of the ills we shall never overcome.

Morality. Responsibility.

Immoral and irresponsible Man cannot govern himself peacefully and prosperously period. Never has , never will. All efforts to the contrary are called history and they all result in starvation, deprivation and war.

We are no different.

Posted by: just another bitter clinger at November 22, 2014 09:19 AM (+f598)

17 That, WierdDave is a very good question. In what way is this "Executive overreach" different from "just and forceful" action on gay marriage?
They both apparently use the same amendment to support them with the fuzzy claim that they are following the intention that the laws of this country are supposed to serve goodness and plenty and support a heart-wrenching narrative of loss and deprivation.
They both purport to mean that you can destroy the legal basis of a country to get what a vocal minority wants and the country will be stronger for it.

Posted by: Kindltot at November 22, 2014 09:20 AM (t//F+)

18 Excuse me - exactly what kind of libertarian is in favor of big government? That is like Conservative Christians for mandatory post birth abortion. What ever the subject of this letter is - and confused is a good starting point - that person is not a libertarian. Perhaps the word Libertine is more accurate.

Notice I referred to her as a " self styled libertarian". That being said, she's libertarian as all hell- except on a few, personally important issues. That's kind of the point.

Posted by: Weirddave at November 22, 2014 09:23 AM (9422s)

19 You're wrong to be friends with this person, who seems a piece of trash.

[and you are on thin ice. CBD]

Posted by: Trump at November 22, 2014 09:26 AM (G610p)

20 19

Yet, if we cut ourselves off from everyone who disagrees with us, then how do we even begin to persuade them there's a better way?

Posted by: Captain Whitebread at November 22, 2014 09:28 AM (Pd9h2)

21 You don't bother because you can't.

These people are not persuadable

Posted by: Trump at November 22, 2014 09:29 AM (G610p)

22 exactly what kind of libertarian is in favor of big
government?
Posted by: An Observation at November 22, 2014 09:18 AM (ylhEn)

There are a lot of people claiming to be Libertarians who also support actions that will grow the government: Pro fiat money, Pro prohibition, economic revenge against they mythical (non-progressive part of the) 1%, and so on.
Cognative dissonance is with us always, and is stalking the world like a specter. When it gets to a certain level you have an army of useful idiots.

That is a catchy phrase, I should write a book and have the opening paragraph start:

"There is a specter haunting America -- the specter of cognitive dissonance."

You guys want to help? We could hold a congress, or maybe a cocktail party!

Posted by: Kindltot at November 22, 2014 09:32 AM (t//F+)

23 Yeah, people hate it when it's their ox that gets gored.

Posted by: huerfano at November 22, 2014 09:33 AM (bAGA/)

24 Well, Jim Crow was the law, and it was a bad one, and most Republicans are glad it was overturned. Problem with gay marriage is it isn't the decriminalization of homosexuality they're after. They're attacking heteronormativity by demanding that the benefits afforded to promote the nuclear family be extended to *anyone* so long as they are "in love".

Marriage isn't about love only. The religious definition is it's a sacrament, but to the state, it's a contract. Most of the so called benefits can be accomplished through contract law.

Now, if gays wanted to help us reform the tax code or entitlements, that would be a different story. But I don 'to see many gay libertarians except when it comes to open borders, etc.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 22, 2014 09:33 AM (AO8vr)

25 Well put. A very thoughtful letter. All we conservatives can do is try to persuade those who are wrong and disagree with us. I hope your friend finally sees the light. With your gentle persuasion.

Posted by: SH at November 22, 2014 09:34 AM (G3tXg)

26 For some reason a little passage from the otherwise odious William Finn's Falsettoland comes to mind:

I Don't get it. I don't understand.
In the sixties,
Everyone had heart.
In the sixties,
We were all a part of the same team.
In the sixties, we had a new world to start.
Could this... Oh G-D! Don't say it is...
Could this be the new world we started?
There I set brokenhearted.

Posted by: Phil at November 22, 2014 09:34 AM (gTSL/)

27 19
You're wrong to be friends with this person, who seems a piece of trash.

******************
"Love one another, even as I have loved you. Unless they're trash in the opinion of a keyboard kommando." -JC

Posted by: Bob's House of Flannel Shirts and Wallet Chains at November 22, 2014 09:34 AM (yxw0r)

28 For the record...

IMHO, Libertarians are a covert wing of the Democrats party.

Listen carefully to what they say, and then watch what they do.

They field candidates who they know can't get any more than 5 - 6% of the vote, undermining the TRUE conservative.

They condemn Republicans as just as bad as Democrats... That's the BIG lie.

Even the language they use is the language of the Democrats.. "Neocon" and "Repubs"

IMHO, they're even more dangerous than Liberals... More fanatical, more extreme, and less tolerant.

Frank

Posted by: franksalterego at November 22, 2014 09:35 AM (Fh+WR)

29 And here we have the Horde rugby team circa 1958

http://www.ufunk.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/selection-du-weekend-115-35.jpg

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 09:36 AM (YXkpM)

30 Posted by: Kindltot at November 22, 2014 09:32 AM (t//F+)

"Libertarian" is a tough one, because it sounds so romantic and cool. Most self-described libertarians I have met are strongly libertarian on some issues, and much less so on others.

On the surface, it is a powerful ideology, but the libertarian Devil is in the details!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 09:36 AM (Zu3d9)

31
Remind me, what did Nixon do to get impeached?

Posted by: Raspail at November 22, 2014 09:37 AM (4HYng)

32 Listen, and understand! That Ghey is out there! It can't be
bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or
remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are socking a cock.

Posted by: Thin veneer of civility at November 22, 2014 09:37 AM (XzRw1)

33 IMHO, they're even more dangerous than Liberals... More fanatical, more extreme, and less tolerant.

Do we not court them?

Posted by: SH at November 22, 2014 09:37 AM (G3tXg)

34 Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 09:36 AM (YXkpM)

Stolen...oh so stolen.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 09:37 AM (Zu3d9)

35 21 what 21 said. And though I enjoy the occasional conversation, I don't consider them good friends. They're too self absorbed to reciprocate. I do love them, but will lose touch with them over the years. They are drifters.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 22, 2014 09:38 AM (AO8vr)

36 "they're dyed in the wood"

wool

Posted by: despair at November 22, 2014 09:38 AM (dcY7v)

37 28 agreed. Notice they only run as spoilers, not where they can actually win, and you'd think they could in CA, CO or AZ.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 22, 2014 09:40 AM (AO8vr)

38 Yet, if we cut ourselves off from everyone who disagrees with us, then how do we even begin to persuade them there's a better way?
Posted by: Captain Whitebread

^^This! He wrote the argument in its complete form here but note that he plans to share it with his friend in a gentle way "there" (in meatspace).

I'm tired of how we act like such a bunch of crybabies and losers.

It's hard work to communicate good ideas. But still it's necessary and good work.

I get a lot of complaints right now about how cumbersome and expensive medical care is becoming. I gently point out that the government intrusion into my practice drove it out of business - that's why a large entity that charges much more than I ever did now provides the service in question.

When they complain about how hard it is to get in to see a doctor, I point out that the government mandated clumsy intrusive EMR that we were forced to buy and use has ruined doctor productivity across the nation. I used to easily see 25 people a day - now I struggle to complete the visits on 18. Seven people, give or take, every working day will not be seen. Thanks government!

You should see how the loudest whiners (at first) turn out to be exactly the folks who voted for this shi-ite. They get very quiet. I hope and pray that they are actually (for the first time I guess) thinking.

Posted by: Jade Sea at November 22, 2014 09:41 AM (Qgn3C)

39 I've talked about it here before but I have always considered myself a libertarian because I suspect the state and believe strongly in economic rights. Today it seems to means nothing more than sex and drugs. So it probably isn't the best word for me because it is t conveying my true beliefs and conveys more than I really believe.

Posted by: SH at November 22, 2014 09:41 AM (G3tXg)

40 That's also a nice defense of Christianity, too, WeirdDave.

Westboro, being the deviation, gets the attention. And the Christian-bashers in the MFM (BIRM) are more than happy in their hatred to portray them as the norm.

It's just as false a narrative as the caricature of knuckle-dragging Tea Partiers.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, Curmudgeon Extraordinaire at November 22, 2014 09:42 AM (0HooB)

41 Posted by: franksalterego at November 22, 2014 09:35 AM (Fh+WR)

Is it even clear that libertarian candidates invariably draw votes from the Republican?

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 09:42 AM (Zu3d9)

42 CBD steal away. Hope it brought a chuckle. Though the bloke on the end next to the guy all in black looks a bit like Vlad Putin.

*bangs head into keyboard*

Time to conjure some German rabbit dish for story and get at least a couple thousand more words written today.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 09:43 AM (YXkpM)

43 21 You don't bother because you can't.

These people are not persuadable

Posted by: Trump

How many on this site are persuadable? I'll answer my own question. Many if not most. Those that went through the liberal while young phase, and conservative as the intellect and moral grounding further developed, and we were persuaded to change our minds. There's hope for some of them but a closed mind is not a terrible thing waste.

One is really in the soup in college surrounded by those vegetables with firmly held dumb opinions who will enforce compliance with an iron ladle (so as not to mix the metaphor).

Those who can be persuaded, will be persuaded not by argument but by life.

Posted by: dirks strewn at November 22, 2014 09:43 AM (TIgJq)

44 41 Posted by: franksalterego at November 22, 2014 09:35 AM (Fh+WR)

Is it even clear that libertarian candidates invariably draw votes from the Republican?

No. In some cases yes. In others no.

Posted by: SH at November 22, 2014 09:44 AM (G3tXg)

45 And here we have the Horde rugby team circa 1958

*shakes coffee out of laptop*

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, Curmudgeon Extraordinaire at November 22, 2014 09:45 AM (0HooB)

46 But where I think we really miss the boat . . . Conservative values are actually good news. We are so glum - we never really present them as such.

It's good news that raising your values helps you to live a life that is more deeply satisfying.

It's good news that when the government gets the hell out the way people in general are smart and capable and solve their own problems.

It's good news that self-respect gives you so much more in reality than the left's forgery of "self-esteem."

It's good news that our government was founded on principles that allow people to develop their God-given talents and interests to the fullest extent possible.

But we're too busy reacting to the bad news.

You want conservative values to lead our nation? Then start acting as if they already do. The LIVs are followers.

Posted by: Jade Sea at November 22, 2014 09:45 AM (Qgn3C)

47 Those who can be persuaded, will be persuaded not by argument but by life.

I think this is generally true. But you still need to make the argument.

Posted by: SH at November 22, 2014 09:46 AM (G3tXg)

48 I have a gay anarchocapitalist friend, and I like her for not being a cheerleader for POSUS, but she's all over the map with her views. She hates money, but she won't work for free or pay rent. She uses her sexuality to get favors like house sitting for the wealthy, that loathe some 1%. She basically rationalizes what most of us consider responsibility, but has to turn it into a fucking Facebook rant.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at November 22, 2014 09:46 AM (AO8vr)

49 We are so glum - we never really present them as such.

I don't think this is true at all. Go to a packed church on Sunday. Go to a Memorial Day celebration. If any thing I think you have it opposite. But that could just be me seeing things the way I want to see them.

Posted by: SH at November 22, 2014 09:49 AM (G3tXg)

50 Wow WD... powerful and well written. So how do you think Whoppi is going to respond?

Posted by: Yip at November 22, 2014 09:50 AM (84SRe)

51 Weirddave- A great letter but please correct your "dyed in the wood" idiom. It clangs like a dropped tray of silverware. It should be "dyed in the wool."

Posted by: In the bunker at November 22, 2014 09:52 AM (GHdBh)

52 We are so glum - we never really present them as such.

I don't think this is true at all. Go to a packed church on Sunday. Go to a Memorial Day celebration. If any thing I think you have it opposite. But that could just be me seeing things the way I want to see them.
Posted by: SH at November 22, 2014 09:49 AM (G3tXg)

I think we are a joyful bunch particularly when in the company of others who share our vision and values, but we tend to be defeatist when around those who do not. I went years thinking I was the only conservative in my practice because a couple of the most hard-core leftists are so completely obnoxious in the opinions they felt free to voice without any fear of reprisal.

Later I found that I'm probably more the mainstream.

So maybe it's my own cowardice that I'm talking about.

But I've found my voice in the last year and I'm not giving it up.

Posted by: Jade Sea at November 22, 2014 09:53 AM (Qgn3C)

53 "Remind me, what did Nixon do to get impeached?"

Obstructed justice, suborned perjury, abusive audits/investigations, interfered with subpoenas. (The unauthorized bombing of Cambodia charge didn't make it

Yes, this *administration* has done all these, but Obama's not dumb enough to leave a paper/audio trail incriminating himself personally.

(And this comes from someone who wants to name a son "Nixon.")

Posted by: Knemon at November 22, 2014 09:53 AM (zhpLb)

54 41. I've heard that before... Here's the problem...

When someone tells me, they're not voting because they didn't get their perfect candidate, what they're REALLY communicating is "you shouldn't vote either."

I don't know how effective that is, because I'm not that stupid.

I actually had a person at a Republican caucus tell me that, if Ron Paul wasn't the nominee, he wasn't going to vote.

In his little pea-brain, Romney was worse than a Democrat.

Are we still under THAT assumption?

Posted by: franksalterego at November 22, 2014 09:56 AM (Fh+WR)

55

cheesecake for breakfast; bad! but, good!

making some sandwich (French) bread in the bread machine

hubby home

and soccer (don't hate me!)

perfect day so far

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at November 22, 2014 09:56 AM (IXrOn)

56

regarding the post

every gay person I know, male or female feels this way

so do the blacks, hence 99% support for obama

this is also why hillary is so dangerous, just because she's a woman

checkboxes

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at November 22, 2014 09:57 AM (IXrOn)

57 Seriously well written though. I have a Libertarian co-worker/friend that in all manner might as well be a progressive though he constantly claims to be a libertarian. He doesn't mind Obama, he hates Christianity and merely tolerates other religions; loves the green energy scam and their getting help from the Government and hates "big oil". He's even a truther and ... the more I write, I can't believe I call him a friend.. heh.

But he is a genuinely good guy and when we talk, we agree to disagree. He told me I'm the only conservative he talks to.

Posted by: Yip at November 22, 2014 09:59 AM (84SRe)

58 yeah, f*ck cambodia

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 10:00 AM (TETYm)

59 On the surface, it is a powerful ideology, but the libertarian Devil is in the details!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 09:36 AM (Zu3d9)

Until it was captured by the left, the term Liberal meant the classic small government, protecting rights and leaving people alone attitude that you find in writings by Jefferson, Bastiat and even H. Beam Piper.
After the seizure, and I think it is dated to the 1968 elections, there had been no good term for this political philosophy other than small L libertarian and classic liberal.
I have seen various discussions on what the new term should be, L. Neil Smith used the term "Propertarian" and there are terms like "Randian" and Anarcho-captialists, and Mengerism and Misian and Escuela de Salamanca, but the problem with such names is most of them are actually economic theories at the base, and second you have to get name recognization and make it good.
Any suggestion is accepted. Not that I can do anything with the suggestions.

(by the way, talking about safe environments and triggers: for some reason L. Neil Smith is a trigger to various statist-minded people about equivalent to garlic for vampires. Apparently writing stories about antigravity, moving planets, inter-dimensional travel, full body replacements, cybernetic coyotes, three sexed aliens, and blasters is ok, but talk about libertarian free-market anarcho-capitalism you are talking CRAZY TALK and no-one should listen to such unrealistic twaddle. *sigh*)

Posted by: Kindltot at November 22, 2014 10:00 AM (t//F+)

60 She's a hypocrite. She doesn't care. Just like you said, it only matters to her when it's her ox being gored. Most people I know are like this. It's why they aren't conservative. The "greater good" is really just their personal preferences. Nothing else matters.

Posted by: NJRob at November 22, 2014 10:00 AM (5oi29)

61 Your friend isn't a libertarian. She's "I want what I want when I want it and anybody who tells me about consequences is a big meanie."
Thing about libertarians is that they seem to promise you can get what you want when you want it when the government is out of the way. The real ones, however, do understand consequences and modify their actions accordingly.

Posted by: Richard Aubrey at November 22, 2014 10:01 AM (Q/3mX)

62 I once felt obligated to always vote for the woman on the ticket. Then I grew up.

Posted by: Jade Sea at November 22, 2014 10:01 AM (Qgn3C)

63 "...when it's your ox being gored."
Yup, that's the point at which pretty much all prog/commie/totalitarian utopianism breaks down.

Posted by: Brave Sir Robin at November 22, 2014 10:01 AM (5buP8)

64 I haven't seen this movie yet ...

Posted by: Adriane the Movie Critic ... at November 22, 2014 10:01 AM (P+IZm)

65 Bravo, Dave, well said.

Posted by: Santos L. Halper at November 22, 2014 10:02 AM (eoOaz)

66 Adriane, the Grumpy Cat movie will probably do better at the box office.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 10:02 AM (YXkpM)

67 "Can you name one totalitarian regime in history that has been kind to minorities or homosexuals? I can't think of any. Can you?"

*****

Well, the Spartans come to mind, although I know the prevelance of homosexuality in that culture is hotly debated.

But it was pretty tough on the Helots.

But as far as being a minority, that is why the LGBT lobby keeps adding new letters (non-CIS, pan-sexual, trans, tranny, intersexed, etc). Also, that is why they keep trying to push statistics that say homosexuality is much, much more prevalant. Which leads to why, when polled, the general public thinks that something like 25% of the population is gay.

So that, plus immigration to change the demographics of the nation leads to the possibility that the new "minority" would be, well YOU, Weirddave.

A straight, white male.

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:03 AM (C+qQ0)

68 The best way to stop HRC is to ensure that the Dims know that we have a deep bench of competent women in the race. If they wanna bet hard pink, we can ante up.

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 10:04 AM (TETYm)

69 Is your gay friend named Gabriel Malor?

Posted by: shnee at November 22, 2014 10:04 AM (T1lV8)

70 What's the difference between a President writing the law and a judge?

Posted by: --- at November 22, 2014 10:05 AM (MMC8r)

71 29 And here we have the Horde rugby team circa 1958

http://www.ufunk.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/selection-du-weekend-115-35.jpg
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 09:36 AM (YXkpM)

I LOL!! Good one!

Posted by: Studying to be an Ette at November 22, 2014 10:05 AM (sUJHF)

72 The best way to stop HRC is to ensure that the Dims know that we have a deep bench of competent women in the race. If they wanna bet hard pink, we can ante up.

yeah, but there not real wymins ...

Posted by: Adriane the MFM Critic ... at November 22, 2014 10:05 AM (P+IZm)

73 Beautiful written, WeirdDave! I hope you are able to persuade your friend. It does take time, but it does happen. Love and gentle persuasion can work.

I one listened to Christian program about how a lesbian feminist English professor came to Christ and is now married to a man. It took a coupple of years of friendship with a Christian couple who loved her as she was but weren't afraid to let their beliefs be known, reading the entire Bible (yes, even the dreaded Old Testament), and eventually attending the couple's church which was full of Christians willing to love her and be real with her.

Not saying it will happen to everyone, but showing love (not coddling or embrace of everything they do) to all is worth it, as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at November 22, 2014 10:06 AM (r+7wo)

74 But I see that the fellow who wrote my hit single "MacArthur Park" is forming an exploratory team for a run at the Presidency.

Now that's the Sporting Life.

Posted by: Zombie Richard Harris at November 22, 2014 10:06 AM (3r2wi)

75 Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 10:02 AM (YXkpM)

Heh!

The mountain lion was merwolling to go out side in upper 40s. Merwolling to come back in commenced soon.

Posted by: Adriane the Feline Animal Companion Critic ... at November 22, 2014 10:08 AM (P+IZm)

76 The day will be bad, and the night will beyond imagining.

Posted by: Ghost of Republic Future at November 22, 2014 10:10 AM (c+gwp)

77 the new "minority" would be, well YOU, Weirddave.

A straight, white male.

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:03 AM (C+qQ0)

Given that women make up slightly more than half of the population in the United States, & that it's been that way for longer than any of us have been alive, men (to say nothing of straight or white) aren't exactly a new minority.

Posted by: Bumpersticker Notary Sojac at November 22, 2014 10:10 AM (MbqmP)

78 Barack Obama is a stuttering clusterf*ck of a malignant traitor.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at home at November 22, 2014 10:10 AM (M1uf/)

79 From A Man for All Seasons:

William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!

Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?

William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!

Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, FOR MY OWN SAFETY SAKE!

Posted by: Semi-prostrate recliner at November 22, 2014 10:11 AM (BKaug)

80 For all of you bitching and judging Dave's friend, I think he is right on by recognizing that she has libertarian tendencies but doesn't live up to them. If you're trying to persuade someone to join your side, it doesn't help to bitch and moan about how they aren't a purist. It's better to take that common ground, cultivate it, and help right thinking to grow.

We all have blind spots where one competing value takes priority over another. Conservatives do this too.

Posted by: Santos L. Halper at November 22, 2014 10:11 AM (eoOaz)

81 Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at November 22, 2014 10:06 AM (r+7wo)

This is the disconnect in our current discourse on homosexuality.

The reflexive response to all criticism of any facet of homosexual life is the accusation of "hate."

I am confident that it is intentional, and not driven by emotion.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 10:12 AM (Zu3d9)

82 Posted by: Bumpersticker Notary Sojac at November 22, 2014 10:10 AM (MbqmP)

*****

Exactly.

Check your privilege. Watch your gaze.

(Although I think "gaze" has five "a's", just like "racism"

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:13 AM (C+qQ0)

83 Sounds like your kitteh got a rude shock.

I see Cinemark is showing from the Met Opera Barber of Seville starting at 11:55am today. And running for 210 minutes. Alas will have to pass.

Not only because it will be a warm day for yard work. Plus there is about 20 showings of Mockingjay. And its before Thanksgiving. Pass on the mob.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 10:14 AM (YXkpM)

84 chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at November 22, 2014 10:06 AM (r+7wo)

*****

Do you know baldilocks?

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:15 AM (C+qQ0)

85 *tosses one recipe out because of an obvious typo*

I guess Hasenpfeffer is it.

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 10:16 AM (YXkpM)

86 the new "minority" would be, well YOU, Weirddave.

A straight, white male.

The day straights are a minority (in ANY demographic) will be a looooong time coming.

Posted by: --- at November 22, 2014 10:17 AM (MMC8r)

87 It always amazes me when comfortable Westerners think that this economically privileged, well-fed, socially libertine, disease and politically free condition in which they are cocooned is a natural state of mankind; and not purchased with the blood, sweat, and tears of 5,000 years of Judeo-Christian cultural development.

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 10:19 AM (TETYm)

88 6 Beautifully written - if we were all communicating our values this well we'd own the culture.

Posted by: Jade Sea at November 22, 2014 09:00 AM (Qgn3C)

To own the culture, you cannot communicate like this. This is reasoning in the form of written words. The part of the culture that needs to be "owned" is the part that cannot be reached in this manner.

In my opinion the only way to reach the part of the culture that needs to be reached is to formulate messages in the manner that the left has been doing.

Through entertainment. You have to make the lessons understandable by way of demonstrated example. The people we need to reach are not philosophers or reasoners, they are mostly emotion driven and shallow thinkers.

You have to fight fire with fire. You have to present entertainment that makes the point you want to make and it has to be done in such a way that they think the moral point was obvious.

Liberals are good at this because they like drama and they have always argued with emotion. We are not because we tend to be pragmatic and logical.

They have been winning because of their monopoly in "news" and entertainment. We need to fight on this battleground as much as we can.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:20 AM (txvbW)

89 53 "Remind me, what did Nixon do to get impeached?"
Obstructed justice, suborned perjury, abusive audits/investigations, interfered with subpoenas. (The unauthorized bombing of Cambodia charge didn't make it
Yes, this *administration* has done all these, but Obama's not dumb enough to leave a paper/audio trail incriminating himself personally.
(And this comes from someone who wants to name a son "Nixon.")
Posted by: Knemon at November 22, 2014 09:53 AM (zhpLb)

Nixon didn't do anything to get impeached, because he wasn't impeached.
He probably would have been impeached, but he resigned first.

I'm old enough to remember that.
I'm also old enough to have been awarded the "Armed Forces Expeditionary Medal" for either invading or bombing Cambodia (your definition) while Nixon denied that was happening to the public.

I fully expect things to devolve into "Nixon started Vietnam" again soon.
Most of those people have that seared (SEARED) in their memory.

Posted by: jwb7605 at November 22, 2014 10:20 AM (ZALPg)

90
Best I've read on this issue yet. I'm waiting for my gay friends and family to start bitching about Obama's illegal over reach. Then I'm gonna lay this on them.

Posted by: TruthinessSeeker at November 22, 2014 09:06 AM (LLOa1)

I predict this reasoned argument will not make one whit of difference. They may even say that it has a point, but it will not move them in any way that counts in the long run.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:21 AM (txvbW)

91 Okay, I know I'm late to the thread (and even later, really, since i took time to at least skim the comments) but it seems to me that those excoriating this friend as "not a libertarian" are actually condemning her for being Human.

We all have failings- sometimes those failings involve not realizing that something we think is good is actually bad. There are a whole lot of conservatives, including me and others of the Horde, who were all gung-ho for the Patriot Act when it was first introduced.

A failure of philosophy may be a moral failure, but it should not result in condemnation.

I'm not a fan of the athiest part, but if she's a libertarian "in many ways," then she's already got one foot out the door. Saying "she can't be persuaded" and "don't waste your time," is saying "well, since she didn't come in all by herself, she's not worthy- kick her the rest of the way out."

That may influence people, but it won't make many friends.

WeirdDave's way is the right one here. Make the points gently and over time. Help her see that her philosophy is muddled and even contradictory in places, and then let her come to the correct conclusions.

C.S. Lewis was a nigh-militant anti-Christian before his conversion, after all. Whatever you think of Christianity, he was certainly one of her greatest Apologists of the 20th Century.

Posted by: AllenG (Dedicated Tenther) at home at November 22, 2014 10:21 AM (M1uf/)

92 Say goodbye to your cherished friendship. You'll never get anywhere. Her defenses are profound and quite unassailable. Impervious to reason. Pointing out inconsistencies will only bounce right off. You can repeat until your dying day and have no impact whatsoever except to make her contorted logic even stronger. You present reason, she has her own born of emotion made of titanium plated reinforced 18 feet of concrete. All challenges thicken it. Actual logic means nothing at all. Maturity will not rectify it, no, maturity with make it even stronger. Deliver any one of your lines, one at a time, gently over time, she'll return each one a pretzel.

Ask me how I know.

No wait, don't ask. I'm tired of talking about it.

Ten bucks says she never had any interest in marriage whatsoever And if she did then she'd already be married on her own and regard marriage a state of mind, and say piss off to anybody who doesn't like it. Suddenly validation by government means everything whereas before it meant the same thing as validation from her pet dog. If she is thinking and saying "I win, I win, I win, hurray for my team, I win" then she had better be married and if not then she's just full of shit. And if she is married she's still full of shit.

Posted by: bour3 at November 22, 2014 10:22 AM (5x3+2)

93 Posted by: jwb7605 at November 22, 2014 10:20 AM (ZALPg)

Amazing how history has been revised.

It's almost as if there is some plan in place!

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 10:22 AM (Zu3d9)

94 What ever the subject of this letter is - and confused is a good starting point - that person is not a libertarian. Perhaps the word Libertine is more accurate.

Posted by: An Observation at November 22, 2014 09:18 AM (ylhEn)

From what I can tell, Libertine and Libertarian are virtually interchangeable. The only difference would appear that most Libertarians are somewhat Fi-Cons.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:24 AM (txvbW)

95

lemme see

- have to protect Darren Wilson and his family
- have to protect police officer's in Ferguson families
- have to protect the jury
- have to protect the innocent civilians/residents

look what this has come to

everyone to witness protection

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at November 22, 2014 10:24 AM (IXrOn)

96 Anna, everyone who has seen a bugs bunny cartoon knows what Hassenpfeffer is. 'Course I was imagining that you were doing a noir version of Who Shot Roger Rabbit, and Jessica would be channeling Heddy Lamarr

Posted by: Kindltot at November 22, 2014 10:24 AM (t//F+)

97 Good post, weirddave. I always say that the difference between conservatives and liberals is the emphasis on process vs. results.

Conservatives believe there are right and wrong ways to do things, and rules that must be followed. While they don't always get the result they hope for, the system works well most of the time in the long run.

Liberals have a desired result in mind, and will do whatever it takes to achieve it. "The end justifies the means", in other words.

Posted by: rickl at November 22, 2014 10:26 AM (sdi6R)

98
"There is a specter haunting America -- the specter of cognitive dissonance."

Posted by: Kindltot at November 22, 2014 09:32 AM (t//F+)

Brother ain't that the truth!

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:26 AM (txvbW)

99 The day straights are a minority (in ANY demographic) will be a looooong time coming.
Posted by: --- at November 22, 2014 10:17 AM (MMC8r)

*****

And they'll get it, looooong and hard.

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:26 AM (C+qQ0)

100 "Yet, if we cut ourselves off from everyone who disagrees with us, then how do we even begin to persuade them there's a better way?"

stupid point. Darwinism will take care of that.

We keep on saying that we have guns, we are better organized, we have resources and we are more intelligent, therefore, if we cut off all leftists from our circles the result will be that when the shit hits the fan THEY are going to be the ones in trouble and we will be saving a lot of headaches.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 10:27 AM (rnV3B)

101 That's 'Hedley.'

Posted by: Hedley Lamarr at November 22, 2014 10:28 AM (MMC8r)

102 WeirdDave you hit nail on the head. Hope the hammer of reality doesn't wound your friend too much.

Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at November 22, 2014 10:28 AM (vvqdk)

103 I hit post too fast ...

I want to teach them a lesson. No, not the real hard lesson. I want to create a Civilization mod that allows a culture in their fanciful image to be played. Low birth rates, high numbers of unproductive citizens, high taxes, fractious government, little military strength - lots of cultural fluff, high diplomacy ratings, big bonuses for all the soft sciences - but penalties for the actual engineering technologies; if they survive into the modern era, massive penalties for environmental reasons.

Lets see who gets to Alpha-Centuri first.

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 10:28 AM (TETYm)

104 How about we separate marriage and state?

Posted by: MacGruber wrote Obamacare at November 22, 2014 10:30 AM (nlQae)

105 Westboro, being the deviation, gets the attention. And the Christian-bashers in the MFM (BIRM) are more than happy in their hatred to portray them as the norm.

It's just as false a narrative as the caricature of knuckle-dragging Tea Partiers.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, Curmudgeon Extraordinaire at November 22, 2014 09:42 AM (0HooB)

Enemy action by the Media Weapon of the Democrat party.

Seems like we would figure out at some point that we need to get our own media weapon, but we keep bringing squirt guns to gun fights.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:30 AM (txvbW)

106 Posted by: MacGruber wrote Obamacare at November 22, 2014 10:30 AM (nlQae)

Works for me!

That's how the French do it, and when the Frogs do something better than we do, you know there's a problem.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 10:31 AM (Zu3d9)

107 I have two gay sisters who screamed to the skies for years about the atrocity of gays not being allow to marry.

Neither of them has ever sustained a relationship longer than a year.

Posted by: creeper at November 22, 2014 10:31 AM (QsrJt)

108 93 Posted by: jwb7605 at November 22, 2014 10:20 AM (ZALPg)
Amazing how history has been revised.
It's almost as if there is some plan in place!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 10:22 AM (Zu3d9)

One of my (very liberal, but in denial that she's liberal) daughters posted some nonsense on Facebook about "the way things were" back in the '50s under Eisenhower.

I issued a rebuttal not dissimilar in tone to the letter in this post, pointing out that one of us lived through the period, one of us did not, and the talking points she was using were a delightful blend of half truths and revisionist history.
I included links to the actual text of the points she was claiming, which was one of those "The Republican Party used to stand for this but now it stands for this" type things.

She decided to "take a break from Facebook for a month or so".

Posted by: jwb7605 at November 22, 2014 10:32 AM (ZALPg)

109 104 How about we separate marriage and state?
Posted by: MacGruber wrote Obamacare at November 22, 2014 10:30 AM (nlQae)

*****

Gonna take a lot of work. Social security, inheritance, insurance, divorce law...

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:32 AM (C+qQ0)

110
Those who can be persuaded, will be persuaded not by argument but by life.

Posted by: dirks strewn at November 22, 2014 09:43 AM (TIgJq)

Also by false life. There's a reason why Hollywood puts so many liberal messages in their entertainment. It persuades people to their way of thinking. The fact that the examples presented are false, simply doesn't register. People remember them as life examples that happened.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:32 AM (txvbW)

111 57 -- Yip -- In a nut-shell, you've described about 90+% of the 'libertarians' I've run across.

The 'typical' libertarian is a 'don't touch my favorite shiny' sorta person.

This is why Libertarianism is a total waste of time as a cohesive political movement.

Until libertarians grow the fcuk up and acknowledge that society needs moral guardrails and something resembling a cohesive national culture (linked to a moral culture)... they'll be nothing more than a collection of spoiled brats.

Posted by: CPT. Charles at November 22, 2014 10:32 AM (/mTq0)

112 Gays reason with their dicks, they have been grown by their associations full of self absorbed that convinced them that they are superior beings. Heterosexuality is so primitive! Breeding with the opposite sex partner is so last millennia. Now they order children via catalogues, next on Amazon! They are so modern!

All the judicial decisions in their favour inflate their egos even more. All the times republicans/conservatives/religions cave in to them they become more and more arrogant (did you bother to notice?).

All the times you give gays the time of the day you are feeding their delusion.

Stop feeding the beast. Or be prepared for the consequences, which is losing every election.

Do you really think self absorbed drama queens with a distorted sense of morality that will NEVER step in to defend the Christian photographer, baker, minister is a demographic worth courting?

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 10:33 AM (rnV3B)

113 "Love one another, even as I have loved you. Unless they're trash in the opinion of a keyboard kommando." -JC

Bingo.

Posted by: wisenheimer at November 22, 2014 10:33 AM (qnhj2)

114
You want conservative values to lead our nation? Then start acting as if they already do. The LIVs are followers.

Posted by: Jade Sea at November 22, 2014 09:45 AM (Qgn3C)

The few real world examples of Conservatives leading by example are not sufficient to offset the host of examples people see on the idiot box. Especially when many of the people we need to reach have few actual conservative people around them.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:34 AM (txvbW)

115 Good works WD.

Posted by: Fewenuff at November 22, 2014 10:35 AM (zPNX5)

116 67 "Can you name one totalitarian regime in history that has been kind to minorities or homosexuals? I can't think of any. Can you?"

*****

Well, the Spartans come to mind, although I know the prevelance of homosexuality in that culture is hotly debated. ...

Posted by: Taco Shack

The only hotly debated topic in Sparta was who was pitching or catching.

Posted by: dirks strewn at November 22, 2014 10:35 AM (TIgJq)

117 The question about the percentage of gay population is extremely interesting in one respect-- the percentage of studies never varies, always ~2-3%.

You'd think that the 'acceptance' business would allow for growth, but it doesn't.

Posted by: --- at November 22, 2014 10:36 AM (MMC8r)

118 Posted by: creeper at November 22, 2014 10:31 AM (QsrJt)

Normally, it seems that gay men are the one hopping from bed to bed, while lesbians pair up.

In fact, there is a joke about this.

(ahem)

"What does the lesbian bring on the second date?"
.
.
.

"A moving van."'

(crickets)

Thank you, I'll be here till Sunday. Try the veal and tip your waitress.

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:36 AM (C+qQ0)

119 So WeirdDave is a racist homophobe then?

Kidding obviously. Great letter. Hope she takes it to heart.

Posted by: RWC at November 22, 2014 10:37 AM (xbWRx)

120 29
And here we have the Horde rugby team circa 1958
Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 09:36 AM (YXkpM)
************************************************OMG! That is hysterical! The AoS Fappers.

Posted by: creeper at November 22, 2014 10:39 AM (QsrJt)

121 Meh. All my homo friends (who were otherwise sane Southern conservatives) are dead from the AIDS long since.

The Militant Gays have chosen the other side in the cultural war. I wouldn't accept them as a friend if they were straight. I didn't force them to be my enemy, they chose to be.

Posted by: toby928(C) at November 22, 2014 10:39 AM (rwI+c)

122
Well, the Spartans come to mind, although I know the prevelance of homosexuality in that culture is hotly debated.

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:03 AM (C+qQ0)

The Spartans, and the rest of Greece practice paedophilia. Adult males having sex with young boys was normal in their culture, but adult males having sex with adult males was not.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:39 AM (txvbW)

123 Cpt Charles its pernicious across the spectrum.

Selfishness dressed up basically. We have gone from "Ask not what your country can do for you" to "Ask how the government can cater to make you shut up and vote for them."

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 10:40 AM (YXkpM)

124 Yeah I'm done with the 'oppressed' in this country. How you can see beheadings and gang rapes in other countries and still flap your f*cking gums here I don't know.

I'm sick of the poor. I teach them. I-phones, two flatties, but free lunch, vision, dental truck that comes to school, clothing drives. But 'pobre'. STFU.

But I'm of Italian white privilege and don't know I'm a racist (so I was told my an ex-friend)).

yeah, the only thing I relish in with this Amnsesty move is that now the FSA is crying on their lobster because they may get less. It is music to my ears.

...and good morning all.

Posted by: Viv Savage at November 22, 2014 10:41 AM (HRo7B)

125 Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:36 AM (C+qQ0)

Oh, they do pair up. But a year later the moving van is back.

Posted by: creeper at November 22, 2014 10:41 AM (QsrJt)

126 Reread rant....Obviously I need cawfee.

Posted by: Viv Savage at November 22, 2014 10:42 AM (HRo7B)

127 In retrospect, I think I should have said Civilizational Struggle rather than culture war. The problem for me is not primarily their sexual proclivities, though I reserve the right to make mock of men who suck cock, but rather that they lend their numbers and efforts to the anti-freedom side of the struggle.

Posted by: toby928(C) at November 22, 2014 10:43 AM (rwI+c)

128 The Spartans were all pitchers -- the Helots were catching.

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 10:43 AM (TETYm)

129 Words matter not. A sharp sword? Now that matters. Ah yes, nothing like a good sword fight to settle things.

Posted by: The Spurtans of Spurta at November 22, 2014 10:44 AM (xxobp)

130 Posted by: Viv Savage at November 22, 2014 10:42 AM (HRo7B)

Hey, my sisters told me the same thing. "You're a homophobe! You just don't know it!"

Posted by: creeper at November 22, 2014 10:44 AM (QsrJt)

131 Just heard from a producer of the games I called the other night. He said that the only feedback he got the day after the game is the we "did great". Obviously, he may be exaggerating a bit, but it's what he said. So now I'm angling for a game around next weekend so I can get out of driving to Atlanta for Thanksgiving with the in-laws.

Posted by: Lincolntf at November 22, 2014 10:45 AM (2cS/G)

132 I one listened to Christian program about how a lesbian feminist English professor came to Christ and is now married to a man. It took a coupple of years of friendship with a Christian couple who loved her as she was but weren't afraid to let their beliefs be known, reading the entire Bible (yes, even the dreaded Old Testament), and eventually attending the couple's church which was full of Christians willing to love her and be real with her.

Not saying it will happen to everyone, but showing love (not coddling or embrace of everything they do) to all is worth it, as far as I'm concerned.

Posted by: chique d'afrique (the artist formerly known as african chick) at November 22, 2014 10:06 AM (r+7wo)

This will probably offend some people, but it is my observation that most Lesbians would actually prefer a man, but some of them have been abused by men in the past, and many of them have characteristics that make it difficult to attract a man. (to be polite about it.) They still want love and affection, so they go with their limited options, but when they have an actual choice, they go with nature.

Anne Heche comes to mind as an example of an attractive Lesbian choosing a man over a woman.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:45 AM (txvbW)

133 "they lend their numbers and efforts to the anti-freedom side of the struggle"

wasn't this their primary plan all along. they will not be satisfied until all pregnant mothers claim to wish to have a gay son.

That's the target.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 10:46 AM (rnV3B)

134
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, FOR MY OWN SAFETY SAKE!

Posted by: Semi-prostrate recliner at November 22, 2014 10:11 AM (BKaug)

Elaborate and clever strawman. Libertarians love trotting out this argument.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:46 AM (txvbW)

135 I have never gotten a good answer to why this particular fetish is deserving of respect when so many others are not. Numbers? Wealth? Fabulous fashion sense? Or are they just another rank of cannon fodder for the red rat bastards?

Posted by: toby928(C) at November 22, 2014 10:47 AM (rwI+c)

136 130 Posted by: Viv Savage at November 22, 2014 10:42 AM (HRo7B)

Hey, my sisters told me the same thing. "You're a homophobe! You just don't know it!"

Posted by: creeper at November 22, 2014 10:44 AM (QsrJt)

Yeah, but they get to decide who is and isn't. I used to try to think of a reasoned comeback but now I just don't care "STFU you idiot child."

Posted by: Viv Savage at November 22, 2014 10:47 AM (HRo7B)

137 I approve of Wierd Dave's sentiments but I do have to say that I have never seen a Black, gay, female liberal-libertarian strawman before.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes who will be burned for this at November 22, 2014 10:49 AM (a5F9g)

138 87 It always amazes me when comfortable Westerners think that this economically privileged, well-fed, socially libertine, disease and politically free condition in which they are cocooned is a natural state of mankind; and not purchased with the blood, sweat, and tears of 5,000 years of Judeo-Christian cultural development.

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 10:19 AM (TETYm)

The most astute thing i've read in awhile. You have nailed it.

I keep pointing out that all the Atheist that claim a religion free society is possible are all contaminated with Judeo-Christian values and ideas.

They seem to think what they currently consider "Moral" would remain such if society was purged of all such influences.

They float in an Ocean of Judeo-Christian culture (the current prosperity being one consequence of it) and they are unaware of it's influence on their lives.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:50 AM (txvbW)

139

ot

freebeacon.com

A new video released by the GOP on Friday calls out former Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton for her hypocrisy on the issue of executive action.

In 2008, Clinton said the George W. Bush administration was transforming the executive branch into an "imperial presidency." In 2014, Clinton said she supported President Obama's decision to grant citizenship to more than four million illegal immigrants.

Clinton unknowingly provided the narration for the GOP's newest video.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at November 22, 2014 10:50 AM (IXrOn)

140 " it is my observation that most Lesbians would actually prefer a man, but some of them have been abused by men in the past"

it is not only your observation, in most movies (written by gays and gay friendly people) you get this stereotype a lot.

PS: some lesbians were also molested by other females (see Lena Dunham' sister or Chastity Bono)

This is the ugly reality that gays do not want to face and spend trillions to mercenary pseudo scientists to find the elusive gay gene.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 10:51 AM (rnV3B)

141 ...You have to fight fire with fire. You have to present entertainment that makes the point you want to make...They have been winning because of their monopoly in "news" and entertainment. We need to fight on this battleground as much as we can.
Posted by: D-Lamp

Agreed. Our side needs its billionaires to buy some magazines, movie studios, tv stations and newspapers. And we wonder why we're always spit'n in the wind. Fight fire with fire, and the ocassionaly daisy cutter!

Posted by: Daisy Cutter at November 22, 2014 10:51 AM (xdMK5)

142 I saw this pic, and immediately thought of AtC:

http://tinyurl.com/oljyxlg

Posted by: SMFH at it all at November 22, 2014 10:51 AM (OsWis)

143

Westboro, being the deviation, gets the attention.
And the Christian-bashers in the MFM (BIRM) are more than happy in their
hatred to portray them as the norm.

It's just as false a narrative as the caricature of knuckle-dragging Tea Partiers.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, Curmudgeon Extraordinaire at November 22, 2014 09:42 AM (0HooB)

Never forget that Westboro are Democrats. The Westboro Baptist Church is not really a church; it is more a family scam, posing as a church to avoid income tax. They are mostly lawyers, and all Democrats. Founder of the scam, the late Fred Phelps, who now enjoys the barbed cock of Satan, ran unsuccessfully in at least one election as a Democrat, and was the county campaign leader for the Al Gore campaign when that scammer ran for President.

And scratch a Libertarian, find a pot head. Some pot heads seem to take it as a personal insult that their intoxicant of choice is illegal, and identify as Libertarians in an effort to legalize it. You probably have seen this stance from some commenters here. They are painfully obvious, and it's amusing as hell to listen to them try to deny the obvious.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at November 22, 2014 10:52 AM (7MWCL)

144 I saw this pic, and immediately thought of AtC

Fluffy!

Posted by: toby928(C) at November 22, 2014 10:52 AM (rwI+c)

145 In his little pea-brain, Romney was worse than a Democrat.

The question isn't whether the R is better than the D, it's whether they're EFFECTIVELY better.

Evidence has been damn sketchy lately.

Posted by: DaveA at November 22, 2014 10:53 AM (DL2i+)

146 Well I am glad the picture of the Horde rugby team has brought a few chuckles. Keep Fapping team!

Posted by: Anna Puma (+SmuD) at November 22, 2014 10:53 AM (YXkpM)

147 I don't even bother with the one any more, Viv. After she got on my son's Facebook page and told him to get out of the country if he didn't like the way Obastard was running it, I wrote her off. And I'm barely sustaining a relationship with the other.

Interestingly, both of them retain some interest in men. Go figure.

Posted by: creeper at November 22, 2014 10:53 AM (QsrJt)

148

Suddenly validation by government means everything ...

Posted by: bour3 at November 22, 2014 10:22 AM (5x3+2)

These people want affirmation. They want to believe what they do is not abnormal and unnatural. They want everyone forced to buy in to their psychosis.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:55 AM (txvbW)

149 Hey, my sisters told me the same thing. "You're a homophobe! You just don't know it!"

My retort: "Just because I don't care for broccoli doesn't mean I'm unnaturally afraid of it."

Posted by: BackwardsBoy, Curmudgeon Extraordinaire at November 22, 2014 10:55 AM (0HooB)

150 weird post

Posted by: dedomeno at November 22, 2014 10:55 AM (UccCH)

151 Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:45 AM (txvbW)

Yeah, I've seen this in real life too.

I'm not to sure about your homo/paedo distinction via the Greeks though.

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:56 AM (C+qQ0)

152 " I have never gotten a good answer to why this particular fetish is deserving of respect when so many others are not. Numbers? Wealth? Fabulous fashion sense? Or are they just another rank of cannon fodder for the red rat bastards?"

They had more money then the others to purchase and overplay the victimhood card.

Didn't you notice that the first thing the gaystapo mentions is the ability to assist a dying partner at the hospital? This directly pierces into the emotionalism of the stupid voters (copyright Gruber).

Most hospitals do not care. There are old people assisted by other relatives that are not their spouse.

The percentage of cases where gays have been denied entrance is probably close to zero and possibly because the family of the dying stepped in.

There was no need to defecate on the marriage institution. But that was their plan all along.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 10:57 AM (rnV3B)

153 In his little pea-brain, Romney was worse than a Democrat.

In a sane world, Romney would have been the Democratic candidate. A decent man, successful Governor of a deep blue state, patriot - but never served, family money, statist, deep wall street and big business ties. The fact that the Overton window has shifted so far Left is an indictment of our times.

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 10:58 AM (TETYm)

154
We keep on saying that we have guns, we are better organized, we have resources and we are more intelligent, therefore, if we cut off all leftists from our circles the result will be that when the shit hits the fan THEY are going to be the ones in trouble and we will be saving a lot of headaches.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 10:27 AM (rnV3B)

And yet the leftist leadership and donors tend to be very wealthy. Why do you suppose that is?

Well they tend to be sitting on gold mines. (figuratively.) There is a reason that much of the leftist strength comes from Major port cities on the coasts.

In a way, the Geography foreordains that they will be leftists.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:59 AM (txvbW)

155 I want to teach them a lesson. No, not the real hard lesson. I want to create a Civilization mod that allows a culture in their fanciful image to be played. Low birth rates, high numbers of unproductive citizens, high taxes, fractious government, little military strength - lots of cultural fluff, high diplomacy ratings, big bonuses for all the soft sciences - but penalties for the actual engineering technologies; if they survive into the modern era, massive penalties for environmental reasons.

Lets see who gets to Alpha-Centuri first.

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 10:28 AM (TETYm)

They will just say your computer model is wrong.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:00 AM (txvbW)

156 PS: some lesbians were also molested by other females (see Lena Dunham' sister or Chastity Bono)

Not just lesbians.

Like Don Lemon, the stories male homosexuals have of being abused as children are shockingly normal, but forbidden to factor in to their psychology.

Posted by: --- at November 22, 2014 11:00 AM (MMC8r)

157 To be fair initially the Nazi regime was nice to homosexuals, given that at least some of its main leaders were a bit light in the loafers, but that changed rapidly.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:01 AM (39g3+)

158 147 I don't even bother with the one any more, Viv. After she got on my son's Facebook page and told him to get out of the country if he didn't like the way Obastard was running it, I wrote her off. And I'm barely sustaining a relationship with the other.

Interestingly, both of them retain some interest in men. Go figure.

Posted by: creeper at November 22, 2014 10:53 AM (QsrJt)

Hey creeper, the older I get the more my time left is precious to me. I enjoy a spirited discussion, and try to ask more questions about a persons position than I give opinion, maybe there's common ground to work from (and like this place I might learn something) and we can keep drinking together...but I have trimmed down the victim name callers to almost zero. Waste of life's energy.

Posted by: Viv Savage at November 22, 2014 11:01 AM (HRo7B)

159 I abhor the hijacking of the term -phobia or -phobic, just because I hate you - doesn't mean I fear you. That is a particular leftist, pyscho-babble. Fear and hate are only intermingled for sheep. I hate for damn good reasons.

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 11:02 AM (TETYm)

160 "And yet the leftist leadership and donors tend to be very wealthy. Why do you suppose that is?"

inheritance and good luck.

Not all the retards that voted for obozo are leftists with a 6 digits salary, I was talking about the masses.

We also have already established that letist millionnaires are the least likely to give to charity, so what is left is that probably a lot of good willed republicans are actually spending time and money helping out the very people that despises us.

Stop feeding the beast.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 11:02 AM (rnV3B)

161 Lets see who gets to Alpha-Centuri first.

http://civilization.wikia.com/wiki/Sid_Meiers_Alien_Crossfire

Colonel Santiago always wins.

Posted by: DaveA at November 22, 2014 11:02 AM (DL2i+)

162 104 How about we separate marriage and state?

Posted by: MacGruber wrote Obamacare at November 22, 2014 10:30 AM (nlQae)

How about we don't. Normal Marriage is in the best interest of the state, and their are foundational reasons why this should be so, not the least of which the strength of a state comes from fecundity.

The state also has need to insure issues of inheritance and preclude the spreading of diseases.

But we've gotten a long way from where we started. People no longer see the need for many Chesterton Fences.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:02 AM (txvbW)

163 And scratch a Libertarian, find a pot head. Some pot heads seem to take it as a personal insult that their intoxicant of choice is illegal, and identify as Libertarians in an effort to legalize it. You probably have seen this stance from some commenters here. They are painfully obvious, and it's amusing as hell to listen to them try to deny the obvious.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at November 22, 2014 10:52 AM (7MWCL)

I'm a "pot-head", I guess. I oppose prohibition. What am I denying?

Posted by: tooltip at November 22, 2014 11:03 AM (T1lV8)

164 BTW I dont identify with Libertarians because I just dont care about Zionist Chemtrails

Posted by: tooltip at November 22, 2014 11:04 AM (T1lV8)

165 Neither of them has ever sustained a relationship longer than a year.

Posted by: creeper at November 22, 2014 10:31 AM (QsrJt)

Again, this is just about formal affirmation of their behavior. (In most cases.)

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:04 AM (txvbW)

166 Just because I don't care for broccoli doesn't mean I'm unnaturally afraid of it.

Yeah the left is great on twisting language. I'd quote something from Dalrymple here on controlling people but Pixy won't let me. So you can check this link for the quote at American Digest if you choose:

http://tinyurl.com/pcz3c2u

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:04 AM (39g3+)

167 "Libertarian" is a tough one, because it sounds so romantic and cool. Most self-described libertarians I have met are strongly libertarian on some issues, and much less so on others.

On the surface, it is a powerful ideology, but the libertarian Devil is in the details!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 09:36 AM (Zu3d9)

I have to disagree. Libertarianism is a weak philosophy that relies on a misguided view of human nature and an arrogance about the ability of one's own intelligence to predict the effects of one's actions.

In theory, Libertarianism says "Do what you want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else." In practice, this becomes, "I'll do whatever I want and pretend that there are no negative consequences for anyone else, and if there are I don't care."

Posted by: Colorado Alex at November 22, 2014 11:05 AM (10ydV)

168 I'm a-walkin' in the rain,
Tears are fallin' and I feel the pain,
Wishin' Bark weren't mean to me,
To end this misery
And I wonder--
I wah-wah-wah-wah-wonder,
Why,
Why, why, why, why, why I ran away,
Yes, and I wonder,
A-where I will stay-ay.
I'm a runaway,
Run, run, run, run, runaway.
Run, run, run, run, runaway.
Run, run, run, run, runaway.

Posted by: Weepin' Johnny Boehner at November 22, 2014 11:05 AM (LImiJ)

169

OT, but related, because Kohn

a must read for obvious reasons,

Kohn: Hey, what about all those white rioters?
POSTED AT 10:01 AM ON NOVEMBER 22, 2014 BY JAZZ SHAW

hotair top story

really, read it

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at November 22, 2014 11:05 AM (IXrOn)

170 To be fair initially the Nazi regime was nice to
homosexuals, given that at least some of its main leaders were a bit
light in the loafers, but that changed rapidly.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:01 AM (39g3+)
1920 Germany was very socially liberal, that turned out well. The violent gays were useful, for awhile, once they became a political liability ...

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 11:05 AM (TETYm)

171
Until libertarians grow the fcuk up and acknowledge that society needs moral guardrails and something resembling a cohesive national culture (linked to a moral culture)... they'll be nothing more than a collection of spoiled brats.

Posted by: CPT. Charles at November 22, 2014 10:32 AM (/mTq0)

This.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:05 AM (txvbW)

172 RE: marijuana and libertarianism, I think the movement is going to lose a lot of steam and voice (what it had) as states legalize weed.

In my experience, it seems that many, if not most, libertarians are about people who want their personal vice legalized and not stigmatized by society. They put it in terms of freedom and social benefits, but in the end its just "leave me alone to do my thing, man."

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:06 AM (39g3+)

173 ...be enthusiastic about fiat rulings when they benefit you

Fiat really should put out a Clown Car Special Edition for these guys.

Posted by: t-bird at November 22, 2014 11:07 AM (FcR7P)

174 159 I abhor the hijacking of the term -phobia or -phobic, just because I hate you - doesn't mean I fear you. That is a particular leftist, pyscho-babble. Fear and hate are only intermingled for sheep. I hate for damn good reasons.

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 11:02 AM (TETYm)

THIS...thanks Jean for saying it so clearly. Also, you have my dearest late mother and mother in laws name so you must be clever and witty and adorable. Two strong wise women who I respected and loved.

Posted by: Viv Savage at November 22, 2014 11:08 AM (HRo7B)

175 "Libertarian" is a tough one, because it sounds so romantic and cool. Most self-described libertarians I have met are strongly libertarian on some issues, and much less so on others.

On the surface, it is a powerful ideology, but the libertarian Devil is in the details!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 09:36 AM (Zu3d9)

No one can ever explain what a Libertarian is.

It's whatever they want it to be.

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at November 22, 2014 11:08 AM (IXrOn)

176 135 -- toby928(C) -- Why them?

Because they are the sharpest dagger for gutting a 'christian'/'stable family' culture.

No more, no less...

That, and (some) gays revel in debasing public culture...

...when compared to Folsom Street revelries, other examples 'inappropriate public behavior' seem like chump change.

Posted by: CPT. Charles at November 22, 2014 11:08 AM (/mTq0)

177 The thing is as much fun as it is to bash libertarians for their faults, I'll take a double helping of it right now to counteract the nanny state and exponentially expanding government. Libertarianism may go too far, but we need a bit of that in our present day to push back against the left going too far.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:08 AM (39g3+)

178 Posted by: Colorado Alex at November 22, 2014 11:05 AM (10ydV)

Surface: "Do what you want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else."

Details: "I'll do whatever I want and pretend that there are no negative consequences for anyone else, and if there are I don't care."

QED

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 11:09 AM (Zu3d9)

179
Normally, it seems that gay men are the one hopping from bed to bed, while lesbians pair up.

In fact, there is a joke about this.

(ahem)

"What does the lesbian bring on the second date?"
.
.
.

"A moving van."'

(crickets)

Thank you, I'll be here till Sunday. Try the veal and tip your waitress.

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:36 AM (C+qQ0)

Lesbians are far more likely to enter monogamous relationships than are male homosexuals. Lesbians and Male Homosexuals are quite different in behavior.

Male Homosexuals are always looking for "strange" ( as males do in general ) and Females are always looking for someone to love. (as Females do in general.)

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:09 AM (txvbW)

180 I'm not a big L libertarian but I think the "drug war" is lost, apologies to DLamp. Or at least the cost of it as it is being prosecuted is not worth the result.

I also want to audit and/or abolish the Federal Reserve.

Posted by: toby928(C) at November 22, 2014 11:10 AM (rwI+c)

181 D-Lamp, when you stop spewing and start providing suggestions I'll listen.

what you are crying now is pretty much:

"For God's sake, let us sit upon the ground

And tell sad stories of the death of kings;

How some have been deposed; some slain in war,

Some haunted by the ghosts they have deposed;

Some poison'd by their wives: some sleeping kill'd;

All murder'd: for within the hollow crown

That rounds the mortal temples of a king..."

Richard was crying that the struggle was too much and tried to convince everyone around him to agree the struggle was too much.

And Richard wound up driving off his supporters and rolling over to Henry and dying in captivity.

Posted by: Kindltot at November 22, 2014 11:11 AM (t//F+)

182 but in the end its just "leave me alone to do my thing, man."

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:06 AM (39g3+)

Is this a criticism?

Posted by: tooltip at November 22, 2014 11:11 AM (T1lV8)

183
Be nice if my lifespan sees the prog left and their acolytes discredited and relegated to impotence.

They WILL collapse, that's preordained from past history.

The bedrock--Bill Of Rights, Constitution, etc is still there and won't be going away any time soon.

No putting that genie back in the bottle.

So take heart, at SOME point the good guys win.

Posted by: irongrampa at November 22, 2014 11:12 AM (jeCnD)

184 "Is this a criticism?"

Depends what your thing is, really. But my thought was that while libertarians will talk big about social freedom and the glories of liberty and so on, what they really mean is "I wanna [insert personal vice]." So its... disingenuous, to steal from Rush.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:14 AM (39g3+)

185 Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 11:09 AM (Zu3d9)

Pretty much.

Most libertarians that I've met take a chinese buffet approach to society. "I'll take family values with a strong economy, but throw in legalized drug use and social accommodation of polygamy!" The problem is that even if you can make the argument that position X is ok on its own, position X may still not be able to coexist with the larger structure of society.

Posted by: Colorado Alex at November 22, 2014 11:16 AM (10ydV)

186 Sally Kohn is a prime example.

She's easily one of the most intellectually dishonest leftists out there, that column is a great case-in-point.

Posted by: --- at November 22, 2014 11:17 AM (MMC8r)

187 Sally Kohn is a prime example.

She's easily one of the most intellectually dishonest leftists out there, that column is a great case-in-point.
Posted by: --- at November 22, 2014 11:17 AM (MMC8r)

what she said was crazy sauce

it's jaw dropping like the author said

Posted by: artisanal 'ette at November 22, 2014 11:19 AM (IXrOn)

188 I'm a "pot-head", I guess. I oppose prohibition. What am I denying?

Posted by: tooltip at November 22, 2014 11:03 AM (T1lV

But you aren't identifying as a Libertarian, are you? The people that I mock are the ones who claim high and mighty moral authority as Libertarians, but get positively unhinged about the topic of drug prohibition.

Face it, as a pot-head, you have it good right now. The stuff is cheap, widely available, and un-taxed. Unless you are very clumsy, or very stupid, or very unlucky, the chance of getting busted and going to jail for possession is minuscule. Just enough to give you that thrill of tasting forbidden fruit. Legalize pot, what happens? First and foremost, that thrill is gone. Secondly, the price won't go down, because the State will extract in taxes any savings to be had from relieving the producers of the necessity to be underground. And with the State now having a legitimate financial interest in the product, you can expect ever-more intrusive enforcement by revenooers.

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at November 22, 2014 11:19 AM (7MWCL)

189 ...These people want affirmation. They want to believe what they do is not abnormal and unnatural. They want everyone forced to buy in to their psychosis...

Posted by: D-Lamp

Said another way, they not only want acceptance, which is fine by me, they also want us to endorse their behavior, not fine by me.

They can have their gay lifestyles and I can have my guns, but I won't expect them at our 2A parade and don't expect me at their ass-less chaps and thongs Thanksgiving parade. Faire is fair.

Posted by: Daisy Cutter at November 22, 2014 11:20 AM (xdMK5)

190 "The problem is that even if you can make the argument that position X is ok on its own, position X may still not be able to coexist with the larger structure of society."

This is where the concept of the social contract has to be understood. Some things which in themselves may not be wrong have to be reduced or avoided if you want to have a coherent, productive, and prosperous society. This isn't tyranny from above, but a general agreed upon personal sacrifice by some in order to gain the benefits of a stable culture.

So you can't run about naked shooting your firearms into the air in town, even if nudity and firearms are not in themselves bad things. Its a trade off, because we live in that kind of world.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:20 AM (39g3+)

191 "I think the "drug war" is lost"

This might be true, but as an employer I want to be empowered to test all employees for weed and other drugs. If found positive I want to have a constitutional right not to hire them or to fire them. No whining about 'right to work' even when stoned.

Or you want your child going to school on a school bus driven by a pot head?

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 11:20 AM (rnV3B)

192
it is not only your observation, in most movies (written by gays and gay friendly people) you get this stereotype a lot.

PS: some lesbians were also molested by other females (see Lena Dunham' sister or Chastity Bono)

This is the ugly reality that gays do not want to face and spend trillions to mercenary pseudo scientists to find the elusive gay gene.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 10:51 AM (rnV3B)

It is an ugly little secret that many (one study says ~40%) homosexuals were molested as children. The incidence of molestation among them is far higher than in the general heterosexual population.

I have long believed that engaging in rampant homosexuality is a coping mechanism to convince them that they are "normal" and that there is nothing wrong with what happened to them.

I think same sex molestation often creates a psychological break in some people and they can only cope with it by engaging in same.

There might be a genetic component in how people respond to it.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:21 AM (txvbW)

193 I could turn a blind eye to my libertarian neighbor's penchant for weed if it ended with him sitting on his back porch smoking the product of the three plants growing in his basement closet. Nobody really cares about that. But all too often these folks get their names in the local paper because they did something stupid, like turning 3 plants into 300 and going into business. Or driving while loaded and having weapons concealed on themselves. I have no pity for fools. At the same time, I identify with the libartarian's healthy skepticism of govt and politicians. A conundrum again.

Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at November 22, 2014 11:23 AM (vvqdk)

194 I have long believed that engaging in rampant homosexuality is a coping mechanism to convince them that they are "normal" and that there is nothing wrong with what happened to them.

I think it's the same mechanism that leads children who have been molested to become molesters themselves.

Posted by: --- at November 22, 2014 11:23 AM (MMC8r)

195 There seems to be a common, but not universal, tendency among homosexual males to have had serious problems with fathers or dads who were worthless, abusive, or otherwise a mess.

There is a reason that psychologists used to call homosexuality a mental illness, and it wasn't raw bigotry or religious zeal.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:24 AM (39g3+)

196
I'm not to sure about your homo/paedo distinction via the Greeks though.

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:56 AM (C+qQ0)

Look it up. I used to have a link. I can probably find one quickly enough.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:24 AM (txvbW)

197 "I have long believed that engaging in rampant homosexuality is a coping mechanism to convince them that they are "normal" and that there is nothing wrong with what happened to them."

we will never know since the gaystapo embargoed all possible studies on the matter as the topic is highly taboo.

Anyway, the conservatives that sing along to this delusion (also on this blog) are part of the problem, not of the solution.

We have understood long ago that those aren't noble souls with a modicum of intellectual honesty, they want to simply take advantage of all the popularity they have and use against the very people who made them popular.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 11:24 AM (rnV3B)

198

This mentions it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:25 AM (txvbW)

199 Homosexuality is actually spread from Worcestershire sauce-spraying airplanes flown by Golden Retrievers. True story.

Posted by: The Spurtans of Spurta at November 22, 2014 11:26 AM (xxobp)

200 One of our problems is the hubris of thinking that there is a correct way to structure society. I think that there's only good enough, and more importantly, there is what is acceptable to the polity. That's why I'm a SuperFederalist. I want laws to be agreed upon at the very lowest level possible. States, counties and cities should be allowed to have their own mores in a marketplace of governments. A good polity should have few laws and change them seldom because a good law merely solidifies what the polity wants to do anyway.

Posted by: toby928(C) at November 22, 2014 11:26 AM (rwI+c)

201 From WZ: FBI arrests New Black Panthers for attempting to use explosives in Ferguson "protest".

Posted by: The Great White Snark at November 22, 2014 11:26 AM (LImiJ)

202 From WZ: FBI arrests New Black Panthers for attempting to use explosives in Ferguson "protest".

Posted by: The Great White Snark at November 22, 2014 11:26 AM (LImiJ)

How long before Holder's department of Just-Us finds a way to screw up the prosecutions and let them walk?

Posted by: Alberta Oil Peon at November 22, 2014 11:28 AM (7MWCL)

203 I think if homosexuals would just calm and quiet down, if they would keep it to themselves and not feel the need to make their sexual deviancy the centerpiece of their existence that must be embraced and beloved by all... they'd be a lot better off and society would say "well you're weird, but to each his own."

But there does seem to be a compulsion among many homosexuals to trumpet and display themselves as obnoxiously as possible. And I use the word "many" advisedly, since they make up about 2-3% of the population at most but large numbers will show up in parades and such.

Even the percentage that needs to be flamboyantly, distinctively "gay" in dress, behavior, and speech are demonstrating their nature unnecessarily. Nobody forces you to dress like the people that show up in Zombie's photo essays. You do that on purpose.

Just lay off all that and you'd find yourself much more tolerated in society. But they can't seem to help themselves.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:30 AM (39g3+)

204 In a sane world, Romney would have been the Democratic candidate. A decent man, successful Governor of a deep blue state, patriot - but never served, family money, statist, deep wall street and big business ties. The fact that the Overton window has shifted so far Left is an indictment of our times.

Posted by: Jean at November 22, 2014 10:58 AM (TETYm)

Another astute observation which which I concur.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:32 AM (txvbW)

205 "That's why I'm a SuperFederalist. I want laws to be agreed upon at the very lowest level possible. States, counties and cities should be allowed to have their own mores in a marketplace of governments. A good polity should have few laws and change them seldom because a good law merely solidifies what the polity wants to do anyway."

The ideal is to have government as local and uncentralized as possible, so it is not only reactive to and accountable to the local culture, but more directly representative of it.

And yeah. The more laws a society has, the more lawless it has become. That's what happens when people replace ethics, wisdom, and social contract with codified law. Its how "Zero tolerance" results in a kid with a "gun shaped" toaster pastry being suspended from school.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:32 AM (39g3+)

206 I registered Libertarian for one election cycle. Christine Smith did all the work and they ended up nominating a Republican re-tread. And then, they nominate another Republican re-tread, Rob Johnson, the next election cycle. I'm now an Independent, and will remain so until they bury my @$$.

President Washington warned of political parties in his farewell address. He saw what we've become nearly two-hundred fifty years ago.

Posted by: hadoop at November 22, 2014 11:33 AM (2X7pN)

207 Sally Kohn is a prime example.

-
Pumpkin control! We need pumpkin control!

Posted by: The Great White Snark at November 22, 2014 11:34 AM (LImiJ)

208 From WZ: FBI arrests New Black Panthers for attempting to use explosives in Ferguson "protest".

There's some disagreement over whether it was pipe bombs or straw purchases of firearms between different reports.

Still, jail the fuckers.

Posted by: --- at November 22, 2014 11:35 AM (MMC8r)

209 Surface: "Do what you want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else."
Details: "I'll do whatever I want and pretend that there are no negative consequences for anyone else, and if there are I don't care."
QED
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 22, 2014 11:09 AM (Zu3d9)

Well said. The philosophizing is just air cover for license to do whatever the speaker wants to do. The same people who espouse "Do what you want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else" in one context are at the forefront of banning plastic shopping bags in another.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 11:37 AM (oKE6c)

210 157 To be fair initially the Nazi regime was nice to homosexuals, given that at least some of its main leaders were a bit light in the loafers, but that changed rapidly.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:01 AM (39g3+)

It's much worse than that. The Nazi regime was replete with homosexuals. Now people say this cannot be true because they persecuted homosexuals, but they don't know the details well enough.

The Nazis persecuted effeminate homosexuals but they heartily embraced "Butch" homosexuals. They hated the weak but admired the strong, and many SS and camp guards were viciously sadistic male homosexuals.

Much of this mostly unknown history is covered in the book "The Pink Swastika."

http://www.thepinkswastika.com/5294/index.html

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:37 AM (txvbW)

211 Corgis and such.

Posted by: fairweatherbill bucking the wind at November 22, 2014 11:38 AM (vvqdk)

212 States, counties and cities should be allowed to have their own mores in a marketplace of governments. A good polity should have few laws and change them seldom because a good law merely solidifies what the polity wants to do anyway.
Posted by: toby928(C) at November 22, 2014 11:26 AM (rwI+c)
This. Call me a classical liberal, or a conservative with (a lot of) libertarian tendencies, but this is how the government should be run. Libertarianism is a nice idea, but from what I know and have experienced of human nature, the purest form of it simply won't work. Small government, free markets...yeah, give me those.

And don't get me started on anarchocapitalists...

Posted by: Captain Whitebread at November 22, 2014 11:38 AM (Pd9h2)

213 "Much of this mostly unknown history is covered in the book 'The Pink Swastika.'"

I'm always hesitant to buy into too much of this kind of thing because at least some of the things we 'know' to be true about the Nazis were the result of psyops by British and US Intelligence (like Hitler only had one testicle and syphilis, etc). Maybe its true, maybe it was just useful to demean them.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:39 AM (39g3+)

214 Even the percentage that needs to be flamboyantly, distinctively "gay" in dress, behavior, and speech are demonstrating their nature unnecessarily. Nobody forces you to dress like the people that show up in Zombie's photo essays. You do that on purpose.
Just lay off all that and you'd find yourself much more tolerated in society. But they can't seem to help themselves.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:30 AM (39g3+)

The same thing applies to blacks adopting the "gangsta" look, and then whining that the police and everybody else gives them the stink eye.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 11:39 AM (oKE6c)

215 Yep, Jean, that's a beaut about Romney being the candidate of a sane Dem party in a sane polity.

A good friend and I, sadly, often have the occasion to marvel (in horror) at the state/mindset of today's Dem party (and generally supportive urban electorate) vs. that of only 20 years ago. We were both deep in the machine inside the Beltway for most of our lives, and in a way had a ring-side seat at the horror show, directly experiencing the train jumping the tracks.

And for those who are prone to use the word "gloom" or otherwise revert to emotional frameworks (like ace yesterday in his "why are we so down?" post), note carefully. There are stone-cold, objective, unambiguous indicators that can only terrify a thoughtful citizen.

Favorite example, directly experienced: dilution of one key balancing factor in our system institutional jealousy of power. The Senate, not that long ago, would have slapped down anything approaching the effrontery of Obama's non-recess recess appointments, you'd have seen Majority and Minority leaders in front of cameras, together, in 20 minutes, informing the WH (of either party, any skin color) that it was going to back off its intolerable action if it wanted to see any more appointments confirmed or $$$ appropriated. Of course, no WH would have even thought of trying it.

This seems like a very esoteric and insubstantial thing (and yes, the Senate won its lawsuit over the matter). But it really was a stunning development. That is, the fact that one party (Dems) actually was acquiescing in surrender of one of their most important prerogatives in our system indicates a new and serious erosion in the brilliant checks and balances built into our system. The founders figured, sensibly, that they could always count on human weakness (in this case, jealousy of prerogatives) to protect the system and ensure division of power.

The issue, like my wall of text, is boring and arcane-seeming.

It ain't.

Posted by: rhomboid at November 22, 2014 11:42 AM (afQnV)

216 It's much worse than that. The Nazi regime was replete with
homosexuals. Now people say this cannot be true because they persecuted
homosexuals, but they don't know the details well enough.

The Nazis persecuted effeminate homosexuals but they heartily
embraced "Butch" homosexuals. They hated the weak but admired the
strong, and many SS and camp guards were viciously sadistic male
homosexuals.

The SA was founded and run by homosexuals. Ernst Roehm was a flamer, as were many of the top brass of the SA. During the Night of the Long Knives the SS caught them all in a Munich hotel with young boys and had to pry them apart (spray them with a garden hose?) before executing them.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 11:42 AM (oKE6c)

217 32 Listen, and understand! That Ghey is out there! It can't be
bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or
remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are socking a cock.

OMG! You're right! They've won!

Posted by: A Cock at November 22, 2014 11:42 AM (9422s)

218
I'm always hesitant to buy into too much of this kind of thing because at least some of the things we 'know' to be true about the Nazis were the result of psyops by British and US Intelligence (like Hitler only had one testicle and syphilis, etc). Maybe its true, maybe it was just useful to demean them.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 11:39 AM (39g3+)

The book (and webpage) quotes it's sources. They seem pretty solid to me.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:45 AM (txvbW)

219 And yeah. The more laws a society has, the more lawless it has become. That's what happens when people replace ethics, wisdom, and social contract with codified law. Its how "Zero tolerance" results in a kid with a "gun shaped" toaster pastry being suspended from school.

This is also the essence of Judaism evolving into Christianity, minus the spiritual aspects, of course.

Posted by: A Cock at November 22, 2014 11:46 AM (9422s)

220 Cock sock off.

Posted by: Weirddave at November 22, 2014 11:46 AM (9422s)

221 C. Taylor, you touched on a key point.

So many of life's most important rules are UNWRITTEN.

Decency, humaneness, fairness, humility, sense of limits, these are things inculcated from birth through family, school, social settings.

Well, used to be, in many cases. The decline in that process - abetted by a growing, stupid, malevolent state - underlies so much of our trouble. And solutions to that Rube Goldberg erosion of social underpinnings fully enage my own sense of humilitary and limitations, and I have no idea where to start ....

Posted by: rhomboid at November 22, 2014 11:47 AM (afQnV)

222
The SA was founded and run by homosexuals. Ernst Roehm was a flamer, as were many of the top brass of the SA. During the Night of the Long Knives the SS caught them all in a Munich hotel with young boys and had to pry them apart (spray them with a garden hose?) before executing them.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 11:42 AM (oKE6c)

I did not know that particular detail, but I am not surprised. From my reading and observation, it has always been thus with this group.

How can it be otherwise? Hedonism doesn't comprehend the concept of boundaries.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:48 AM (txvbW)

223 There are stone-cold, objective, unambiguous indicators that can only terrify a thoughtful citizen.

Posted by: rhomboid at November 22, 2014 11:42 AM (afQnV)

Yup.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:49 AM (txvbW)

224 Didn't read all the comments, but one of weirddave's key points here is the one I of course instantly think of when Gabe's viewpoint was discussed.

The lawlessness of judicial tyranny and legislation from the bench has no greater example than the redefinition of marriage, using the most abused tool of the last few decades - absurdly defining some cultural or social change you favor as a "civil right". The marriage redefinition debacle is the quintessence of judicial tyranny and the self-deligitimizing of the judiciary.

Yet Gabe would presumably whine on in a literate manner about this abusive process being applied to something he cares about, as a "conservative".

Seriousness and intellectual integrity, do you speak them, motherf***er?

Posted by: rhomboid at November 22, 2014 11:50 AM (afQnV)

225 Trading Institutional Power for Party Power always ends with Military Power replacing both. Hail Caesar!

Posted by: toby928(C) at November 22, 2014 11:51 AM (rwI+c)

226 189 ...These people want affirmation. They want to believe what they do is not abnormal and unnatural. They want everyone forced to buy in to their psychosis...
Posted by: D-Lamp
Said another way, they not only want acceptance, which is fine by me, they also want us to endorse their behavior, not fine by me.

There's another problem, and one that doesn't get aired much, but should, and that is the public health problem posed by male homosexuals. They are the main reservoir of STDs in the population, because guys will pork anything and everything, as we all know.

In normal people that urge gets largely reined in by women, the nitrogen to mens' oxygen in the social atmosphere. But without women, it's on, and diseases spread like wildfire, as we've seen (not just AIDS, but syphilis, gonorrhea, and hepatitis B, the last of which was the model epidemiologists used as a proxy for AIDS in the early days of epidemiological research).

Male homosexuals maintain this reservoir of disease, and periodically re-inoculate the normal population through the bisexuals among them.

So this "do what you want as long as you're not hurting others" crap needs to be re-examined.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 11:51 AM (oKE6c)

227 What happened to the SA is a prime example of why I don't buy the "Nazis were heavily gay" argument. That and the fact that whatever the picadillos of the ruling class, gays in the general population were sent to the camps.

Posted by: Weirddave at November 22, 2014 11:52 AM (9422s)

228 So this "do what you want as long as you're not hurting others" crap needs to be re-examined.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 11:51 AM (oKE6c)

And that is the central flaw in Libertarian philosophy. They ignore consequences that aren't immediate and in close proximity.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:53 AM (txvbW)

229
I did not know that particular detail, but I am
not surprised. From my reading and observation, it has always been
thus with this group.

How can it be otherwise? Hedonism doesn't comprehend the concept of boundaries.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:48 AM (txvbW)
Here you go: "One American journalist would later write, "[R�hm's] chiefs, men of the
rank of Gruppenfuehrer or Obergruppenfuehrer, commanding units of
several hundred thousand Storm Troopers, were almost without exception
homosexuals."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Rohm (look out for the umlaut over the "o")

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 11:54 AM (oKE6c)

230 227 What happened to the SA is a prime example of why I don't buy the "Nazis were heavily gay" argument. That and the fact that whatever the picadillos of the ruling class, gays in the general population were sent to the camps.

Posted by: Weirddave at November 22, 2014 11:52 AM (9422s)

Read the counter argument at that website. I think it's evidence is compelling.

http://www.thepinkswastika.com/5294/index.html

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:55 AM (txvbW)

231 Later folks.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:57 AM (txvbW)

232 6 Beautifully written - if we were all communicating our values this well we'd own the culture.
Posted by: Jade Sea at November 22, 2014 09:00 AM (Qgn3C)

Excellent point. I get so frustrated when I seen these mealy mouthed Republicans on talk shows reacting to some crime this administration is committing. Ordinary people, both on this site and other conservative blogs, can argue for conservatism with much more eloquence than the GOP can. I yell at the TV saying "no, that's not the main objection to what Obama's doing, why don't you bring up XY or Z" and they don't. Or they sit there and allow the Dems on the panel to twist their words around so they're put on the defensive.

It's sickening.

Posted by: Donna &&&&&& V. (brandishing ampersands) at November 22, 2014 11:59 AM (+XMAD)

233 "There's another problem, and one that doesn't get aired much, but should, and that is the public health problem posed by male homosexuals. They are the main reservoir of STDs in the population, because guys will pork anything and everything, as we all know. "

And what modern medicine does for them? create a medicine that allows them to screw senselessly without condom just by pumping up immune defences and allegedly removing the aids threat.

But the medicine will not remove all the other STDs.

So wait for other decades of gays whining about all the sexually transmitted diseases they have and bigot haters hetero standing there doing nothing!

Because homophobe and racisss

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 12:00 PM (rnV3B)

234 227
What happened to the SA is a prime example of why I don't buy the "Nazis
were heavily gay" argument. That and the fact that whatever the
picadillos of the ruling class, gays in the general population were sent
to the camps.

Posted by: Weirddave at November 22, 2014 11:52 AM (9422s)
Roehm, head of the SA, was an early member of the National Socialist Workers' Party, and the only person who addressed Hitler as "Adolf" and used the familiar "du" pronoun (at that time, unlike now, reserved for use between family members and extremely close friends).
What happened to the SA took place because 1) the Army, limited to 100,000 by the Treaty of Versailles, was overshadowed by the SA (membership ca. 1 million), and did not like that fact, and 2) the industrialists who were contemplating backing the Nazis (in preference to the Communists, whom they knew would shaft them, and who were the only other serious contender for power) did not like the SA, which was basically like the Sons of Anarchy.
Both groups demanded that the SA get its wings clipped as a condition of supporting the Nazis.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 12:01 PM (oKE6c)

235 In a sane world, Romney would have been the Democratic candidate. A decent man, successful Governor of a deep blue state, patriot - but never served, family money, statist, deep wall street and big business ties. The fact that the Overton window has shifted so far Left is an indictment of our times.

There were Democrats in my youth who I would have voted for. I could stand Romney as a governor or president although he would hardly be my first choice. I could gag and pull the lever for Huckabee over Bill Clinton, for example, but he should be a Democrat too in a sane world.

Not any more. They've so totally purged the moderates and sane people from their ranks that the entire party is unsupportable.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 12:04 PM (39g3+)

236 227 What happened to the SA is a prime example of why I don't buy the "Nazis were heavily gay" argument.

I don't think the fact that Rohm was gay had much to do with why the SA was purged. There was a power struggle going on between the SS and SA. It's not like Hitler woke up one day, was absolutely shocked to discover Rohm and many SA men were gay, and decided he needed to put an end to it.

Posted by: Donna &&&&&& V. (brandishing ampersands) at November 22, 2014 12:04 PM (+XMAD)

237 There were Democrats in my youth who I would have voted for. I could stand Romney as a governor or president although he would hardly be my first choice. I could gag and pull the lever for Huckabee over Bill Clinton, for example, but he should be a Democrat too in a sane world.

Not any more. They've so totally purged the moderates and sane people from their ranks that the entire party is unsupportable.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 12:04 PM (39g3+)

What drives me wild is earnest liberals who talk about the rightward drift of the Republican Party, when the Democrat Party now welcomes out and out Communists (e.g., Van Jones, SEIU). The Repubs just haven't drifted as far left as fast as the Democrats.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 12:07 PM (oKE6c)

238 Donna,

No, but it's not like his gayness protected Rohm either, which one might expect in a organization that was "heavily gay".

Posted by: weirddave at November 22, 2014 12:10 PM (9422s)

239 I don't think the fact that Rohm was gay had much to
do with why the SA was purged. There was a power struggle going on
between the SS and SA. It's not like Hitler woke up one day, was
absolutely shocked to discover Rohm and many SA men were gay, and
decided he needed to put an end to it.

Posted by: Donna V. (brandishing ampersands) at November 22, 2014 12:04 PM (+XMAD)

It had nothing to do with it. Hitler had long known Roehm was homosexual. Roehm made no secret of it whatsoever, and his association with Hitler went back to when Hitler joined the NSDAP - Roehm was already a member.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 12:11 PM (oKE6c)

240 No, but it's not like his gayness protected Rohm either, which one might expect in a organization that was "heavily gay".

Posted by: weirddave at November 22, 2014 12:10 PM (9422s)
To be clear, the NSDAP as a whole wasn't homosexual, nor even the SA as a whole, but rather the leadership of the SA was.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 12:12 PM (oKE6c)

241 Did someone say 'heavily gay', or was that 'heavenly gay'?

Posted by: Bruce Vilanch at November 22, 2014 12:14 PM (xxobp)

242 Sorry, one more point. Roehm was very much a socialist (he put the word in the NSDAP's name), and also responsible for a lot of the socialist items in the NSDAP's platform of the day (which reads like an Occupy manifesto).

So one of the other reasons for purging him was to soothe prospective supporters who were worried about the hard left aspect of the NSDAP.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 12:16 PM (oKE6c)

243 "There is a specter haunting America -- the specter of cognitive dissonance."

You guys want to help? We could hold a congress, or maybe a cocktail party!
Posted by: Kindltot at November 22, 2014 09:32 AM (t//F+)

Well, I've also met social conservatives who are firmly against the Dems position on gay marriage, abortion, etc. but vote Dem because they don't want farm subsidies to end.

"We don't approve of all these people on welfare, but don't you dare say a word against ethanol!"

That explains why Minnesota, Iowa and Kansas elect so many Ds.

Posted by: Donna &&&&&& V. (brandishing ampersands) at November 22, 2014 12:17 PM (+XMAD)

244 @226 Jay --

Thank you for that. The disproportionate public health impacts should be debated.

Posted by: Mustbequantum at November 22, 2014 12:18 PM (MIKMs)

245 Well, the Spartans come to mind, although I know the prevelance of homosexuality in that culture is hotly debated.

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 10:03 AM (C+qQ0)

The Spartans, and the rest of Greece practice paedophilia. Adult males having sex with young boys was normal in their culture, but adult males having sex with adult males was not.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 10:39 AM (txvbW)

So much for the Sacred Band of Thebes... Male-Male relations were why the Greek statues had small genitals, and considered large units to be "bestial".

Posted by: Old Toby at November 22, 2014 12:18 PM (6E7W2)

246 "Well, I've also met social conservatives who are firmly against the Dems position on gay marriage, abortion, etc. but vote Dem because they don't want farm subsidies to end."

Yes, that's extremely problematic. Rural voters on the whole are very conservative but the farmers are so heavily on the government teat they are basically slaves to the left. And they do it mostly because farming is so uncertain: one year you can be rich, the next wiped out. Government subsidies represent stability and safety.

Which is why the Republican Party was all for them in the early 20th century. It was a major GOP platform plank and got the like 3 presidencies in a row before Roosevelt.

Posted by: Christopher Taylor at November 22, 2014 12:22 PM (39g3+)

247 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty
Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 11:25 AM (txvbW)

*****

Yeah, but that is pederasty, not paedophillia. Love of teenagers vs love of boys.

And I think we were originally talking about Greek homosexuality.

Anyway, I can't really remember.

Tell you what. How about we compromise by you agreeing that I was and am right, and we calls it even?

Posted by: Taco Shack at November 22, 2014 12:27 PM (C+qQ0)

248 "Freedom" to a Libertarian means, he'd be "free" to dump a 55 Gallon drum of drain-oil in a river.

Frank

Posted by: franksalterego at November 22, 2014 12:28 PM (Fh+WR)

249 Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 12:16 PM (oKE6c)

I think your take on the SA and Roehm is correct. I read Shirer's Rise and Fall of the 3rd Reich many years ago, but I remember Shirer (a liberal writing in the pre-PC era) made it clear that Hitler didn't care what sort of sexual behavior or depravity his followers engaged in (he knew perfectly well that Goering was a drug addict, for example) as long as they were useful to him. When they weren't the knives came out.

I think perhaps gayness came to be detested by the Party because the Nazis were very big on German women cranking out as many little Aryans as they could. Hitler used to give out medals to women who had big families because he wanted the Germans to outbreed everyone else.

Posted by: Donna &&&&&& V. (brandishing ampersands) at November 22, 2014 12:29 PM (+XMAD)

250 To be clear, the NSDAP as a whole wasn't homosexual, nor even the SA as a whole, but rather the leadership of the SA was.

True, but the point being debated is weather the Nazis as a whole were predominantly or at least majorly composed of gay men. They weren't. Their policies weren't exactly gay friendly either, which goes back to the point I made in the OP.

Posted by: weirddave at November 22, 2014 12:33 PM (9422s)

251 True, but the point being debated is weather the Nazis as a whole were
predominantly or at least majorly composed of gay men. They weren't

I don't think there's any question about that.

For one thing, homosexuals are too small a proportion of the population to comprise a major political party in any case.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 12:48 PM (oKE6c)

252 What drives me wild is earnest liberals who talk about the rightward drift of the Republican Party, when the Democrat Party now welcomes out and out Communists (e.g., Van Jones, SEIU). The Repubs just haven't drifted as far left as fast as the Democrats.
Posted by: Jay Guevara at November 22, 2014 12:07 PM (oKE6c)

This is even more useless and contemptible when ostensible Republicans do this. I've heard this from a real-world friend as well as the morons in the GOPe.

The Democrats have driven so far left as to be off the dial....but wanting to vehemently oppose such a shift makes us "extreme" and "far-right".

Bull goddamned hockey. We stayed where Reagan was at. The rest of the go-along cowards moved left.

Posted by: Hawkins1701 at November 22, 2014 12:52 PM (ZBVzn)

253
So much for the Sacred Band of Thebes... Male-Male relations were why the Greek statues had small genitals, and considered large units to be "bestial".

Posted by: Old Toby at November 22, 2014 12:18 PM (6E7W2)

And here I thought Thebes and Sparta fought a war against each other. Didn't know they were the same thing.

Posted by: D-Lamp at November 22, 2014 01:14 PM (txvbW)

254 "Their policies weren't exactly gay friendly either, which goes back to the point I made in the OP."

excuse me, you are bending over backwards to demonstrate that gays were oppressed by the Nazis, we get your point, you do not want to be labelled homophone and bigot, however, tell me one entity in the 1920s that was gay friendly.

Nothing and nobody except a fringe was gay-friendly 20 years ago. So the Nazis were perfectly in tune with the sentiment of the times.

As someone else said they put in concentration camps the gays that were hostile to the regime whether because they were jews or because they were communists.

The fairy tale that Nazis targeted homosexuals specifically due to their sexual practices is ludicrous and it is exactly the false narrative that the left is building up.

What are you going to claim next? that we have stolen the land from Indians or we should pay retribution to blacks for slavery? or that Palestinians should have back their land from Israel?

If you go to read the most famous gays dead in concentration camps, they were all jews or Marxists (or both).

Let me speculate that the people dead only for being normal people against Hitler far outnumber the number of gheys. But they are making it out like murdering gays was more special then murdering jews or Russians. Because you know, gheys have always to be these special snowflakes.

Why do we need to endure this stupidity on a conservative blog?

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 01:31 PM (rnV3B)

255 Why do we need to endure this stupidity on a conservative blog?

Because we're disinclined to censor your posts ?

Posted by: Weirddave at November 22, 2014 01:34 PM (9422s)

256 You're wrong to even make the attempt to make the argument.

These are such common sense lessons that life teaches. If the person doesn't know them this person is either evil or terminally stupid. Either way it's not worth the breath.

Posted by: Trump at November 22, 2014 01:41 PM (G610p)

257 "Because we're disinclined to censor your posts ?"

whoo hooo

name calling. I suppose because you have valid sources to back up your made up statements.

The people who replied before you brought many links in support of their views, what about yours?

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 02:11 PM (rnV3B)

258 Don't be that guy.

Posted by: toby928(C) has some jokes at November 22, 2014 02:16 PM (rwI+c)

259 From sidebar

"Would You Dip Your Hand Into a Pot of Molten Lead Just Because a Bit of Chemistry (The Liedenfrost Effect) Says You Can Get Away With It?"

in many ways this is the story of Obama.

Posted by: dedomeno at November 22, 2014 02:23 PM (UccCH)

260 31, etc. "Remind me, what did Nixon do to get impeached?"

Violated Federal Law ALIDWR. Acting Like a Democrat While Republican.

Posted by: richard mcenroe at November 22, 2014 02:28 PM (XO6WW)

261 Adolf comes at handy

Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 02:30 PM (rnV3B)

262 Hello fromaabroad-

I don't know whether fromabroad" means that you're a woman or that you live abroad. I have never seen you post on any threads but those dealing with homosexuality but perhaps I've missed that. You clearly feel strongly about this issue. I would encourage you to consider posting on some other topics as well just so we might get a more well rounded view of your concerns.

And Happy Thanksgiving to you.

And I really didn't see any name calling in Dave's post to you.

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at November 22, 2014 02:36 PM (RZlSA)

263 In a yesterday thread I replied to some leftist troll that glorified the European public healthcare system. I have first hand knowledge.

I can't keep up with all the posts. The ones that are subtle and side with the gaystapo agenda like this one, make my blood boil, since this is one global threat (unless you live in Russia or China). I am not touched by your immigration problem or your healthcare problem, as my name suggests.

Gays are sending people of conscience out of work or in jail all over the western world. In my country I have always voted for parties against gay marriage which not incidentally are also very fiscal conservative.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 02:43 PM (rnV3B)

264 I wasn't aware that having gay friends and discussing politics with them made me part of the "gaystapo agenda". That's good to know. When do I get my pink jodhpurs and rainbow stormtrooper boots?

Posted by: Weirddave at November 22, 2014 02:53 PM (9422s)

265 My experience with Weird Dave from numerous posts is that he doesn't side with the Gaystopo-or as I prefer to call them "the gay mafia" at all, and that everyone here including people who are or may be gay are appalled that people be forced out of work or forced to perform gay weddings against their religious scruples.

It is certainly hard to keep up with all the posts.
Please consider sharing some more thoughts on
nationalized healthcare. My sister lives in England , has for about 25 years and has dual citizenship. She sees the pluses and the minuses of NHC.

Is there a thread you can post on that would not make your blood boil? I realize if you're living abroad there's a time difference but the book threads on Sunday morning are always very interesting as are the cooking threads. They are a way not to make your blood boil. :^)

Regards

Posted by: FenelonSpoke at November 22, 2014 02:55 PM (RZlSA)

266 "My experience with Weird Dave from numerous posts is that he doesn't side with the Gaystopo"

Denying that the image of gay persecuted by the Nazis is overblown is being part of the problem.

Some stupid countries are building monuments in memory of gays allegedly killed in WW2 because of their sexual orientation. This is a lie as I have repeated many times.

We keep on saying that gheys are coo-opting the black struggle (without permission) to gain sympathy and have traction and again they are co-opting the holocaust to manipulate people emotionally.

And what do I read here? posters agreeing with them.

"and that everyone here including people who are or may be gay are appalled that people be forced out of work or forced to perform gay weddings against their religious scruples"

I was not born yesterday and the fairy tale of the 'moderate gay' sounds a lot like the fairy tale of the 'moderate muslim'.

Both are fabrication.

As I mentioned earlier, this lesbian-black friend of his could not care less that bakers are forced to close and people are fired in the workplace. The fact that he does not understand this and still call this person 'friend' is enough evidence of lack of intelligence.

All members of the homosexual group will stand idle watching the loudest mouths destroying every liberty as you know them because of tribalism and fear of retaliation, why they fear retaliation? because they are aware of the monster they helped create. So much for the 'moderate gays' and their fanatic supporters even among (fake) conservatives.

Feel free to wake me up when one single homosexual risks in first person for the ideas we believe in. I believe I will sleep 1000 lifetimes.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 22, 2014 04:27 PM (rnV3B)

267 It's ironic, isn't it?

The people who can only survive in a civilized society...are the ones who are destroying it.

Posted by: wheatie at November 22, 2014 06:08 PM (GHmmM)

268 I always thought homo "phobe" was a stupid word, I mean, whose afraid of gay people? Looks like we found one.

I could introduce you to any number of gay people who meet your criteria fromabroad, but why should I bother? I have gay friends who hate the gay mafia and the perverts at Up The Alley every bit as much as you do, I daresay more because they feel it negatively reflects on them personally, fearing that they will be dismissed or condemned not for who they are or what they do but because of the actions of others (I wonder where they got such a silly idea? It's a puzzler!). Doing so would require you to think of people as individuals, not to mindlessly condemn them as a group. What a stupid thing to expect on a conservative message board.

Posted by: Weirddave at November 22, 2014 06:29 PM (9422s)

269 if you make a poll here, more people agree with me than with you.

I do not care about meeting your gay friends.

I do not care to consider them as individuals, they are not worth my time. As the fanatics that protects them left and right.

You are a tribalist and decided to keep in your tribe people who are part of the problem and not of the solution. That is your problem, not mine. being called homophobes by gay supporter fanatics as you is a badge of honour.

They will throw you under the bus when they obtain all the stupid things they want (destroying religious freedom) but you are too stupid to pay attention.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 23, 2014 05:15 AM (rnV3B)

270 fromabroad at November 23, 2014 05:15 AM (rnV3B)

*******

Your comments are pretty rich coming from somebody who has chosen to post on a thread that is long since been idled by new ones, as I'm sure you are aware......or are you?

Posted by: ManWithNoParty at November 23, 2014 05:32 AM (Lf1Q9)

271 and your point is?

the simple fact that a brainless idiot like you decided to reply makes this thread no longer idle, I am sure you are aware, or are you? Go and post on the gardening thread if you wish.

Posted by: fromabroad at November 23, 2014 10:04 AM (rnV3B)

272 MWNP, I think he's in a different time zone, I believe he's in Europe somewhere. I'm part of the problem, not the solution. I wonder if there are a lot of solutions, or maybe just one big final solution?

Posted by: Weirddave at November 23, 2014 11:17 AM (9422s)

273 Looks like fromabroad is still posting. Therefore, he's doubling down on his stupidity in posting on an idle thread.

Keep posting, fromabroad. You'll now be going three times.

Posted by: Haha at November 23, 2014 01:24 PM (GWGz7)

274 Westboro is pretty extreme, but so far as Christian churches are concerned, the bible labels homosexuality as an abomination. You can spin that any way you please, but any Christ-based religion that espouses doctrine that ignores, accepts or embraces homosexuality, is doing so against the clear script of the God's word. I'm not saying they have to make it a "thing". A church needn't go on about the evils of homosexuality any more than they need to laboriously preach on why murder is a bad choice, but they can't white-out a part of the bible because it disagrees with their personal opinion. If there isn't a part of the bible that you personally disagree with, you're not reading it.

Anyway, this whole thing about having to be a Westboro freak to condemn homosexuality is crap. It is God that condemns homosexuality, and agreeing with God is a good. The bible also condemns adultery and fornication, but I don't recommend getting signs and protesting in front of the apartment complex where your daughter and her boyfriend are shacking up. But neither should you normalize her sin into church doctrine so that you can feel okay about it.

Posted by: Immolate at November 24, 2014 10:23 AM (/Tq1J)

275 Hello Web Admin, I noticed that your On-Page SEO is is missing a few factors, for one you do not use all three H tags in your post, also I notice that you are not using bold or italics properly in your SEO optimization. On-Page SEO means more now than ever since the new Google update: Panda. No longer are backlinks and simply pinging or sending out a RSS feed the key to getting Google PageRank or Alexa Rankings, You now NEED On-Page SEO. So what is good On-Page SEO?First your keyword must appear in the title.Then it must appear in the URL.You have to optimize your keyword and make sure that it has a nice keyword density of 3-5% in your article with relevant LSI (Latent Semantic Indexing). Then you should spread all H1,H2,H3 tags in your article.Your Keyword should appear in your first paragraph and in the last sentence of the page. You should have relevant usage of Bold and italics of your keyword.There should be one internal link to a page on your blog and you should have one image with an alt tag that has your keyword....wait there's even more Now what if i told you there was a simple Wordpress plugin that does all the On-Page SEO, and automatically for you? That's right AUTOMATICALLY, just watch this 4minute video for more information at. Seo Plugin

Posted by: seo at November 30, 2014 09:37 AM (iL7YZ)

Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.0448 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0155 seconds, 283 records returned.
Page size 195 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.