Fellow Tea Partier Robert was advising on facebook that we can't just keep preaching to the choir, we have to take the argument to the liberals.
I have sympathy for that argument, I really do. I do have a slightly different perspective on it, complete with sober expectations of the liberals involved. But I appreciate Robert's sentiment and it will at least partially lead you to "Stop an Echo".
To wit, a woman commented on his musings:
Yea well, this stupid person is voting for Obama. Get over it. I don't want some bigot running my country!Ignorant shades of darkness falling, Echo Stopping Time
Out of the mist your voice is calling, Echo Stopping Time
When murky accusations mark the end of light
You'll hear me, at Echo Stopping Time
Note that by implication she is saying that Robert and I do want a bigot running "her" country. I had to ask what made her think Romney is a bigot? The fact that Barack Obama thinks he's just a "Typical White Person™?"
Irony rocks, by the way.
She didn't answer me, but Robert asked who the "stupid person" was, and she replied
umm, I'm the stupid person because I'm a democrat and have been all my life. As long as our house and senates can't come together does it really matter who is president???Oh, dear. Well, I could just let that first part stand, because if that's the way she really thinks, well I should just let her hang in her own word noose.
umm, I'm the stupid person because I'm a democrat and have been all my life.Touche, sweetie. I have nothing to add. :-)
Well, except for the fact that I do. Mostly because of this bit.
As long as our house and senates can't come together does it really matter who is president???Yeah. About that...
The most obvious point is that apparently she does think it matters, because she doesn't "want some bigot running my country" .... so she's voting for the guy whom she perceives is not one over the guy she's been told to believe is one. So she kind of quashed her own argument in a puff of logic there.
But what's really going on here is she's trying to back off of the bigot claim ... the "my guy's better than yours because if I vote for my guy, I'm not a bigot" belief. Which is really what this is all about at its core, or it's what she and way to many others are making it all about. She backs off to what she believes is more common ground, "well a pox on all of them, it doesn't matter... " expecting Robert and me to back down politely and provide her an out. Which in years past we probably would have done.
Ah, but it does matter, even to her contrary to what she said there, as will be evidenced when she walks into the voting booth in a few weeks and gets a rush of GoodPerson Fever as she pulls the lever for Obama, which I have no doubt she will.
Time to get out the ACME Ray Gun of Echo Stoppage™ and turn it on the situation full blast.
So, just so I get this straight... you called Romney a bigot. You've got nothing to back that up, you just did because that's what Democrats do .... well, all the time with their opponents, but especially if they're backed into a corner and they've got nothing but "I'm a Democrat and I've been a Democrat all my life" so I'll support the Democrat because I'm a Democrat, and that's my team right or wrong. "
To which the rest of us say, "huh????"
The default fall-back position on this is to say "well they're ALL guilty" ... which usually works because nobody's perfect and we on this side have, in the past, been too polite not to let is slide.
Well we're not buying this time around (or last time or the time before) ... because yeah, we know that the Republicans are too much like the Democrats ... which is a big part of the problem, but at least they still have an inkling of what the founding principles of this country are and will at least do lip service to them and often a sight better.
Even if Romney were a bigot, which I doubt more than I doubt the moon is made of green cheese, I'd rather have a bigot in the White House who at least feels restrained by the Constitution than a Marxist who is actively trying to circumvent it in any way he can because he wants it replaced with something Mr. Marx would approve of more highly and he knows a majority of the American People would balk at it if he tried to out and out do it.
What do you think "Fundamentally Transform" means? Read their bible, Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals". I did. "Transform" is their NewSpeak, friendly word for "Revolution" ... with a smile. Literally, it is. They say as much.
fun·da·men·tal/ˌfəndəˈmentl/
Adjective:
Forming a necessary base or core; of central importance.
Noun:
A central or primary rule or principle on which something is based.
Synonyms:
adjective. basic - essential - primary - cardinal - radical
noun. principle - basis - foundation - groundwork
trans·form/transˈfôrm/
Verb:
Make a thorough or dramatic change in the form, appearance, or character of.
Noun:
The product of a transformation.
Synonyms:
verb. change - convert - alter - metamorphose - transmute
noun. transformation - metamorphosis - conversion
As in "We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America" -- Barack Obama, right before the 2008 election, about two blocks away from where I work.
What the hell does "Fundamentally Transform" mean? It means, literally, make it something that is nothing like it is. You don't make something that you love something completely different from what it is.
He's an educated man. He knows what these words mean. And his hard core support network knows what they mean, too.
Which is why Sam Webb, Chairman Communist Party USA said of him, "This president can be a transformative leader (he has that potential in my view), but only if he embraces and fights for a transformative agenda."
There's that nice word again, "transformative". He means "revolutionary". Oh yes, he does, no question about it.
Wake the hell up.
The Dems have tried too much too quickly (and in a way, I thank them for this) and the American people are balking. Obama/Pelosi/Reid and company are standing there with their pants around their ankles saying, "who, MEEE???"
Yeah. You.
Well another woman was concerned that I was wasting my breath. And perhaps I was. On the first woman. But that's not what Echo Stopping is about.
Do you really believe that they're educable?Well, there's always a small amount of hope. But I doubt I'll convince her of anything. However, if others are "listening" ....
It's all a part of my "Stop an Echo" campaign .... which I encourage you to join.
The second woman replied
I know five people [..]who would vote for Satan himself if he had a (D) behind his name. You can't even talk to people like that!Which is pretty much true. Can't really argue with that, outside of the slight "always hope" argument.
Which I gave:
I know many former liberals who woke up.
One of them is Bill Whittle. Who is now one of our best spokesmen.
Be polite. Be an ambassador for us. Don't raise your voice impolitely. Know your stuff. And calmly present your case while calmly questioning theirs. Bluntly. But calmly..
Again, EVEN if you don't convince the person you're talking to, there are other people who are less convinced, or are in danger of being convinced of the other side's case ... who need to hear that 1) there is another argument, and 2) it's a lot more rational
In the end, as evidenced by my Stop an Echo post ... it's best to let them hang themselves with their own words. That way, the realization comes from within, not forced by you. That is the best hope of awakening. When it happens as a result of inspecting their own thought processes -- which admittedly most of them won't do, because they've got too much of their image wrapped up in GoodPerson fever (google that, and look for posts from the House of Eratosthenes) ... and any admission to the contrary will implode their entire sense of self-worth. Only the emotionally stable ones will be capable of reconstructing one out of truth and slipping into it like an old shoe ... one custom built by themselves.
This is why Chris Matthews and Rachel Maddow, et. al. were completely freaking the other night. Their worldview was threatened, and they've got no other recourse than to spin like wind-up toys. Pride will not let them abandon the false narrative they've woven their self-worth into.
Which is why Pride is one of the seven deadly sins. You can't grow or correct course when you're married to it.
No comments:
Post a Comment