I get it, but I often lack the verbal clarity. He has had more ... what's the word? Oh yeah. Experience. ( <--- seriously, go read it. It's relevant.)
But wait. He's a black man, and I'm a Tea Partier. Ergo, I'm clearly a racist (just ask the NAACP or anybody to the Left of John McCain), so it would be impossible for me to look up to a black man -- what's up with that?
I said well, she is that, but that's not why. (Ok it's part of the reason why, I won't lie.) But not the main reason.
I'm a supporter, I told her. She (the one who asked the question) couldn't believe it. I have a piece of art on my wall that she created and gave me years earlier. It's a bit of photo art of a Kamakura Buddha. Yeah. Me. I like the Grateful Dead and Eastern Philosophy. And Buddhas. Especially that one.
Neither woman was a supporter of Palin. The friend who knows me well (who is also fairly conservative -- and also not really in to politics) related that she was all about McCain until he picked Palin. And the one who asked the question says she's not into politics at all and she never voted before she got married ... but now she does ... get this ... to cancel her husband's vote.
She said "I won't send you my cartoon of her then. You wouldn't appreciate it." Then she described it to me. It said something about we didn't go through X number of years of women's suffrage to put Sarah Palin in the White House.
I said "I don't get it, anyway. Is it because if she doesn't agree with you then she's not a real woman?" She looked puzzled for a second and replied "Let me think of another way to put it." and fumbled around for a few seconds.
I said "You can't, because that's exactly what they meant."
And what does all this have to do with Thomas Sowell? Well of course conservative blacks like Thomas Sowell are also, according to the Left -- not "real" black people. Which is of course extremely racist. Who says people of one race have to think a certain way except for people who believe that race determines what conclusions an intellect will settle on?
The same people that think gender determines what conclusions an intellect will settle on, that's who.
The same people who really want everyone to think the same way, and that is the way they think. The same people who believe that the proper way to run a society is to put "experts" (defined in the end as "those who agree with me philosophically") in charge of telling us all what we will do, how much we will get paid for it, what we can eat, and how much to work for our neighbors. It's a top down state religion, which is why they can't have competing religious ideas floating around out there, especially ones that teach individual responsibility and individual redemption (they do go hand in hand).
Look at me. Look at the State. Now back to me. I am on a horse. Watching 1984.
4 comments:
"You can't [think of another way to put it], because that's exactly what they meant."
Oh, she had to have a comeback for that one. Maybe it will take her a few minutes or days, but I'd love to see what eventually got dredged up. Hope you follow up with her.
But you're right. Justice Scalia has "wrong" ideas and this makes him a bad person; Justice Thomas comes to exactly the same conclusion about something, and this makes Thomas a much, much, much worse person.
oh, and she's supposed to look like Helen Thomas.
Now the rules here seem to be complicated. Alyssa Milano represents, to me, the outspoken liberal female who most closely resembles my idea of ravishing beauty. But you won't see her run for office, or be appointed to anything except something entirely powerless and ornamental, like "goodwill ambassador" of something. One woman cannot possess both beauty and power. Hillary Clinton is about as pulchritudinous as they can ever get.
Males, on the liberal side of the fence, can be as pretty or as homely as they like. It does seem that if you want to run for President, you have to be somewhat pleasing to the eye. Henry Waxman won't be running for President.
So with real power, among liberals, men have to be at least as handsome as John Kerry, and women have to be at least as homely looking as Hillary. Outside of that, you need to accept some constraints on your power, as must we all really. Unless you are in a position to provide indeterminate benefit to the progressive cause, like Barry & His pals. Then, you can be a sultan, with a nation assembled solely for your pleasure. Tell the lesser mortals to conserve on their carbon emissions and vacation in the gulf, then take off for Maine, with your family dog in a separate jet. The sky's the limit. It's all good.
Well of course there are exceptions to every rule, and then there's the fact that Alyssa Milano ... well, nobody is reallylistening to her anyway. Nice that your pretty face agreed with us, isn't that sweet? Thank you my pet, now go sit down and let the magpies do the rest of the talking, mmmm?
I don't know that this particular woman will come up with a retort. I think she knows I have her, and that that is the real crux of the argument. Palin believes in things that a certain group of women think women shouldn't believe in. That's the bottom line. She was pretty stimied by my statement.
You gotta love it. I think I can summarize...anyone, I mean anyone, who disagrees with the progressive/liberal/statist agenda is a racist, creton who needs to shut up. The better you are at exposing their folly and agenda (two ways of saying the same thing) the bigger the racist and creton you are.
There is an old book called "A Wrinkle in Time" that sure fits what we are seeing happen right here in our great country. "It" has arived and "It" will assimilate you or destroy you. No independent thinking allowed!
I ordered that book on your recommendation a couple months ago. I have it, but I haven't cracked it yet.
Post a Comment