Posted on 03/11/2009 5:10:54 PM PDT by KTM rider
A lawyer lobbying the U.S. Justice Department and the U.S. Supreme Court for a review of Barack Obama's qualifications to be president says a key conservative justice has hinted that another conservative justice has been voting against hearing the dispute.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
Well.., if I was curious about everything that happened around me, I would never get anything done... :-)
I do have to be selective in the nature of curiosity, in order to function normally — so one takes the things of “highest priority” and works on the way down. Of course, one never gets to everything.
But, to put it into perspective, and talking about books, the one by Bernard Goldberg was deserving of *attention* from my curiosity, more so than an unpublished author, such as yourself...
Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0895261901
And..., of course, like I said — I do agree with him.
—
[... get “published” in your manuscript and I may become “more curious”... LOL... ]
But how do you reconcile with the fact that every social or political policy enacted by the left in fact cultivates the exact opposite of its initial claim?
You said — “But how do you reconcile with the fact that every social or political policy enacted by the left in fact cultivates the exact opposite of its initial claim?”
—
Well, I wouldn’t say that all that they say turns out the opposite of what they say. If they say they want socialized medicine, I actually believe what they say. I have no reason to doubt them.
When they say that they’re going to close down Gitmo, I sorta believe them, actually. Now, I may be wrong and they may say they intend to close it down, and yet, they will keep it going. That could very well be possible, but I sorta doubt it.
And when they say that they’re going to raise taxes on the upper income groups — I *actually* believe them. I kinda think they really mean it...
When they say that they intend to put curbs on guns and restrict their sales and restrict how guns are used and kept — I sorta believe them, there, too...
Now, if you don’t believe what they say they’re going to do, then I’m kinda thinking you’re not facing reality here...
Clearly, I need to straighten you out here.
The leftist claim regarding socialized medicine is that it will lower cost and improve quality, but 100% of empirical evidence shows us that socialized medicine increases cost because it dries up supply, and quality plummets. The leftist elite use an entirely different, market based system.
The leftist claim about raising taxes on the rich is that it makes it more fair in general, but the truth is that it decreases prosperity across the board.
The leftist claim about gun control is that it will decrease death and injury by gunshot, but in fact the opposite occurs when gun control measures are put in place.
The leftist claim about closing Gitmo is that it will honor the principle of justice, but in truth it violates justice because the primary function of the enemy combatants, when they are liberated, is to kill innocent civilians. And if they are processed through our civilian courts, they will force unwilling taxpayers to fund their defense and eventually they are likely to be freed or given an unjust sentence by confused leftist judges with the help of idiot defense attorneys.
I rest my case.
They still say they’re going to do it, and I believe that they do intend to do it. So, it’s like I said, I do believe that they are going to do what they say they’re going to do...
What people would find easier to deal with is “what they are going to do” — as that makes it simple...
If I say they are going to raise taxes, then you just have to figure out whether you want taxes raised or not... LOL...
You’re avoiding the entire issue. I wonder why.
But I know you understand what I mean. The leftist claim is always the opposite of the eventual outcome. Always.
Why would anyone want to support such a worldview?
Well, I think it’s you who doesn’t understand what is going on and how to address it. I’m saying to stick to the facts of the issue and not the “explanations” of what one thinks about the “political reasoning” of the issue.
For example, there is “pro-life” and “pro-choice”... well, forget about the explanation so what “pro-life” is supposed to be about or what the explanation of “pro-choice” is supposed to be about.
Stick to the facts — you’ve got a *dead baby*... that should make it simple... LOL...
—
And with the taxes and what they’re supposed to do, you’ve got the explanations on one side and the explanations on the other side, all arguing back and forth with each other. Well, forget about the explanations... LOL...
Do you want increased taxes? — i.e., “the facts”... that makes it pretty simple... :-)
—
And there you have it...
You’re going to need to think more clearly.
If you stick to the facts, you will be aware that socialized medicine increases cost and decreases quality.
If you stick to the facts, you will be aware that today’s liberalism, sprouting as it does from the 1960’s “counterculture” movement, is in fact the opposite of nonconformity because it is defined by the most insidious and may I say ugly kind of conformism—political correctness. Ostracism, the extreme form of conformism, is the modus operandi of leftist social tactics.
The democrats, while claiming to be the protectors of civil rights, are in fact the party who opposed historic civil rights legislation. Today the democrats cultivate division of certain groups, worsening hatred and fear based on race, ethnicity and gender differences.
Everything leftist is the opposite of what it claims.
Well, I’ve said all along, don’t get tangled up in claims — just follow the facts.
Increased taxes, well, that speaks for itself.
Increased costs, well, that speaks for itself.
Dead babies, well, that speaks for itself.
Close Gitmo, well, that speaks for itself.
And on it goes...
—
And I could add to that...
Obama Derangement Syndrome, nothing being accomplished, well that speaks for itself... LOL...
Oklahoma State law, something being accomplished, well that speaks for itself...
[along with Arizona and Missouri, too... ]
No, the lie that is leftist ideology speaks for itself.
So it stands: conservatism is right, liberalism is wrong.
The truth is the stuff that speaks for itself. That’s why it’s easy to state the truth of the matter, like I said — it’s the truth of the matter when you say...
Increased taxes — speaks for itself.
Increased costs — speaks for itself.
Dead babies — speaks for itself.
Close Gitmo — speaks for itself.
Obama Derangement Syndrome, nothing being accomplished — speaks for itself.
Oklahoma State law, something being accomplished — speaks for itself.
Arizona State law, something being accomplished — speaks for itself
Missouri State law, something being accomplished — speaks for itself
That’s all I have to know...
Through liberal management, the “war on poverty” becomes a perpetuation of poverty through dependence on government.
The peace movement invites aggressive action by unfriendly totalitarian countries and terrorist attacks by rogue extremist groups.
Environmental legislation, such as prohibition of forest management, causes massive environmental destruction by forest fires.
Redistribution of wealth, done in the name of the sharing of prosperity, directly stifles economic growth and thus guarantees that everyone will be significantly poorer in the end.
As to whether or not the feminist movement was invented to give unattractive women greater access to the mainstream, I’m not certain.
Make it easy — just stick to the facts of what is the result..., you’ll save a lot of time that way...
Did I mention I’m not 100% sure as to whether or not the feminist movement was invented to give unattractive women greater access to the mainstream?
I like Phyllis Schlafly... :-) She did excellent work on the ERA...
http://www.phyllisschlafly.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_Rights_Amendment
You’ve done well in digesting the facts I’ve presented in this illustration of the unfortunate contradictions inherent to liberalism.
I’d like to ask, in all politeness, that you access your memory of this conversation, periodically, and reflect upon what it means.
Pleasure speaking with you.
You said — “Pleasure speaking with you.”
—
And I thought we were just warming up to each other... :-)
In like manner, I hope you’ve learned a few things about me, by now...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.