| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
28 Feb 2006 06:14:21 AM |
| Object: |
Dinner With A Genocidal Liberal |
http://thedumbdemocrat.blogspot.com/2006/02/dinner-with-genocidal-liberal.html
Dinner With A Genocidal Liberal
The other night I sat down for dinner in the heart of liberal darkness
(NYC) with an extremely well educated guest and found genocide to be
the subject of conversation. In the course of a long conversation I
asked my guest how he felt about imposing 19th Century American
religious, marital values on Africa. He got very sullen as if I were
crazy. He said, "I wouldn't think of imposing a probably outdated
American institution on Africa." I responded, "then your position is,
by default, the status quo which will result in about 30 million dead
people over the next 30 years." He had no further response except what
appeared to be extreme frustration.
He was such a committed American liberal feminist that when confronted
with the theoretical choice between liberalism and genocide he elected
genocide. It was a scary example of how hard it is to fight the brain
dead bigotry of liberalism. Their position is not based on logic and so
it is not possible to dislodge it with logic.
Years ago William Buckley Jr. was asked about why Ted Kennedy never
appeared on his show. Buckley replied, "why does meat avoid a grinder".
You hear the same sentiment from Republicans of all stripes. Liberals
don't come out to think because they don't believe in thinking. They
are genuine bigots who believe in nothing more than the superiority of
their own feelings. Rush Limbaugh, for example, to pick a vastly
different kind of conservative, notices the same phenomenon. He says he
doesn't talk to liberals much because liberals don't call his show to
defeat his positions with logic. It doesn't occur to them. Instead, a
half million of them go to The Daily Kos where they spout off to each
other like bigots at a Klu Klux Klan rally. Debate, deliberation, and
democracy don't occur to them. A famous liberal philosopher(actually
the actor George Cloony) once said liberals don't need the word
"compassionate" in front of the their name to let people know that they
care about people. Sadly, Mr. Cloony and the liberals are unable to
understand that caring (didn't Marx and Mao care?) only matters if you
learn to think about what you care about.
Nevertheless, I persisted with my dinner quest but this time from
another tack. I asked him if he could wave a magic wand that would make
every male in Africa want, as his primary goal in life, to love one
woman, marry her, and raise their kids until death did they part, would
he, or would he do nothing? He again said, "I would not even think of
it." Again, he did not say of what he would think.
Indeed, he very neatly represented why America hasn't been able to help
Africa: because of thoughtless, caring liberals. They have successfully
divided America from its traditional conservative values and rendered
us impotent on the world stage, even in the face of genocide. We can't
promote family values that would save millions of lives because
Democrats don't have family values. We can't intervene intellectually
or militarily because Democratic pride compels Democrats to watch
people die by the millions rather than impose the America values they
hate so much. We can't have allies around the world to promote
civilized values because liberal imperialism has rendered our would be
allies impotent too. The American Republican religious right, then,
remains as the primary and lone outpost of civilization on earth.
Out of guilt we at least do what the liberals will allow, but even then
only by stealth. We give Africans medicine and mosquito nets (even
liberals can't object to that) but certainly not values. For centuries,
though, the world has done just that and it has never worked except to
exacerbate the problems. Medicine and mosquito nets are merely the
product of values, which means that Africans will always need a
perpetually greater supply from us in the absence of their own maturing
values. Interestingly, at the moment, the liberals are led by the rock
star Bono of U2 fame who passionately believes that if only we will
give 1% of our income to Africa it will finally solve their problem.
But how do you explain to a perfectly uneducated liberal rock star and
the politically correct liberal millions who follow him that money does
not create American family values?
It must be the single greatest irony in all of human history that we
have achieved true greatness relative to Africa in the most obvious way
imaginable, and yet the liberals hate America so much they have made it
politically incorrect and rude to say so, let alone to act so, even in
the face of their ethnocentric genocide. The central role of Bono is
perhaps testimony to the liberal need not to think about anything at
all under any circumstances.
Betty Friedan, who died last week, is perhaps the one most responsible
for the liberal feminist destruction of American values which has led
to so many of our problems at home, and to our amoral liberal
imperialism. In all the guilty praise heaped upon her last week, in the
end there is one line most associated with justifying what she has
done, i.e., "no one wants to go back". It was a way to acknowledge that
going back was now a legitimate issue to consider despite how obvious
going forward once seemed. Her main contribution to human evolution was
to help women understand that to be be whole, authentic human beings,
they had to establish an identity outside of their husbands, marriages
and children. She claimed that women who existed merely within their
families were compelled to soulfully ask, "is that all there is?"
Somehow the idea clicked for a lot of women who were somehow convinced
that a superior identity could be had from modern widgets rather than
from modern children. It was a new and better liberal value. So women,
never married, divorced men and /or went to work. The kids were left
behind to raise themselves or given loveless baby-sitters. Being
abandoned was obviously not a great deal for kids. Oddly though, men
got unintended messages from Betty too. Not only were they not
important enough to be loved the old fashioned way, but kids weren't
either. It was a double whammy for kids from the sensitive caring
liberals, but at least Mom had some nice new clothes, a new job, and
some widgets with which to round out her new, superior liberal
identity, albeit at the expense of her meaningless children. Betty's
public relations at the end included a defensive statement about what a
loving mother and grandmother she really was. All the broken homes,
child neglect, and virtual genocide in Africa that Betty left in her
wake did not mean Betty wasn't a loving women it just meant that she
loved widgets and kids equally, no matter what the liberal
consequences. My dinner quest was proof positive of how deeply and
unconsciously liberalism is now a tragic and integral part of our
lives.
.
|
|
| User: "quibbler" |
|
| Title: Re: Dinner With A Genocidal God |
28 Feb 2006 08:13:03 AM |
|
|
In article <1141128861.088434.151570@t39g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>,
soundoftrumpet@lycos.com says...
http://thedumbdemocrat.blogspot.com/2006/02/dinner-with-genocidal-liberal.html
Dinner With A Genocidal Liberal
How is it that the liberal is guilty of "genocide" for doing nothing, yet
when your god does nothing, that's just "free will"? It's also funny
that bonafide confessions of genocide in your own bible, such as the
books of Exodus, Joshua and Judges, are minimized by lying religious
fools like you, while liberals are accused without a scrap of evidence.
The other night I sat down for dinner in the heart of liberal darkness
(NYC) with an extremely well educated guest and found genocide to be
the subject of conversation. In the course of a long conversation I
asked my guest how he felt about imposing 19th Century American
religious, marital values on Africa. He got very sullen as if I were
crazy. He said, "I wouldn't think of imposing a probably outdated
American institution on Africa." I responded, "then your position is,
by default, the status quo which will result in about 30 million dead
people over the next 30 years."
*****. Condoms could save many millions, as could better medicines
culminating in an AIDS vaccine. One doesn't need to impose 19th century
victorian prudishness, which you ignorantly refer to as "19th Century
American religious, marital values". How stupid do you have to be to
believe that Americans in the 19th century invented marriage, anyway? In
any event, there is way that anyone should believe that this self-
reported dinner conversation on the part of the blog moron in question is
anything other than a complete fabrication and a fraud.
--
Quibbler (quibbler247atyahoo.com)
"It is fashionable to wax apocalyptic about the
threat to humanity posed by the AIDS virus, 'mad cow'
disease, and many others, but I think a case can be
made that faith is one of the world's great evils,
comparable to the smallpox virus but harder to
eradicate." -- Richard Dawkins
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Dinner With A Genocidal Liberal |
04 Mar 2006 06:02:45 AM |
|
|
Sound of Trumpet wrote:
Liberals
don't come out to think because they don't believe in thinking. They
are genuine bigots who believe in nothing more than the superiority of
their own feelings.
That is so true. I'm afraid to admit that I'm wrong and that torture
is patriotic and that all poor people are stupid and lazy. It is part
of my bigotry to not admit that and just sit here on my fat *****
spouting tired cliches. It has become an integral part of my
personality.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
