Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Home Of The Brave?

October 31, 2007

It comes as little surprise that the Democrat party is displaying a strong, although decidedly un-American stance nowadays. We have been watching as slowly they have succeeded in demonizing Republicans in general and President Bush specifically. So successful are they at it, many Republicans tremble in fear at the thought of siding with President Bush, who isn’t as much a failure as the Democrats wish us to believe.

Where just a few short years ago, it was the Democrats who were disheveled and unorganized, they have succeeded in falling into lockstep behind each other and their outside numbers whose desire is to turn America from the Land of the Free to the Union of Socialist States of America.

Republicans seem destined to pine away wishing for Ronald Reagan to rise from the dead and continue to reel from the relentless attacks coming from the Democrats. Republicans seem fearful of showing any spine and standing up to the Democrats and defending what America is and always has stood for. Instead, they shy away from President Bush and even conservatism, which is what propelled them into power in 1994.

Instead of standing their ground, Republicans have allowed the Democrats to form the debate and politicize the current war, forgetting that we have been under attack for three decades now from radical Jihadists.

Lies and half-truths flow from the mouths of the Democrats and what Republican stands up and calls them on it? None that I can think of. Instead, I see them stammering half in agreement and half in shame that they may be caught off guard and may have to show some spine by telling the American public just what despots the Democrat party has become.

It is no secret just what the Clinton cartel is in America, they don’t even try to hide it themselves any longer. Hillary currently brags of their wealth and boasts of what she intends to take away from others while also bragging of gutting “the defense industry that needs to be pared down and reined in,” while we have Troops in harm’s way, mind you.

From college, Hillary Rodham wrote for her thesis, “THERE IS ONLY THE FIGHT, An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.” Saul Alinsky wrote the book for American radicalism and apparently Hillary studied it well and must have passed it on to her cohorts in the Socialist Democrat party. Alinsky left thirteen steps to effect social change. See if you can pick out any the Democrat party isn’t following.

Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.

Never go outside the experience of your people.

Wherever possible go outside of the experience of the enemy.

Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.

Ridicule is man's most potent weapon.

A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.

A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.

Keep the pressure on.

The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.

Major premise for tactics is development of operations that will maintain constant pressure upon the opposition.

If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside.

The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.

Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

As for the last, the obvious target of course is President Bush as he is their main point to run against, even though he isn’t up for reelection. Beginning with the lie that he stole the 2000 election and was “selected, not elected,” they have successfully personalized and polarized politics so much that we are now in an “us vs. them” mentality, on both sides.

Notice too that they instigate a scandal, make a mountain out of a molehill, and as Republicans are falling all over themselves seeing who needs ousted or how far they will distance themselves from Bush or whoever it is targeted for the moment, all of a sudden, Democrats have moved on and instigated yet another instance of making a mountain out of a molehill. An accusation is all it takes to succeed as the spineless Republicans representing us in Washington D.C. either will not or cannot do what is necessary.

Here in Washington State, we lost an ally in the fight against the Gay agenda over his own tryst with a male prostitute, who ended up blackmailing him. The crime of blackmail has been forgotten as Dems gleefully point their attacks at the Republican and Republicans demanded his resignation, which came today. That he has been a solid opponent to the Gay agenda in the state is forgotten, as indignation of his lifestyle takes supreme.

Dems paint him as fearful of voting his free choice because of being forced to hide his true self due to Republican homophobia. Republicans just demand he step down, even though he committed no crime. His immorality will most assuredly cost him his marriage. What escapes everyone is that not every Gay person supports the Gay agenda many oppose it. It also escapes Republicans that ours is not a lily-white party and Gays are very much a part of conservatism opposing the radical Gay agenda.

While I do not condone his conduct, he only has himself to blame for whatever happens now, I can’t help but dread who will replace him in our legislature as constituents are now led to believe how evil Republicans are and that a Gay Republican must hide their choice, while Democrats who are Gay may openly flaunt their selves and their intent of implementing a Gay agenda on us, as in hate crimes legislation, hate speech legislation and same-sex marriage. Somehow, Republicans feel good about ousting this man and others, even though in the end, we lose the soul of our country to the Democrats as they continue spreading their Socialist hate and take over the freedoms and liberties we used to have.

In Basic Training in the U.S. Army, we were taught our only prayer when being ambushed was to counter attack the ambushers. There was no reasoning, no appeasing, and no cringing, just counter attack. This catches the enemy off guard and can result in their dishevelment, as they aren’t expecting you to launch a strong and deadly counter attack.

We Republicans have no choice left now but to follow the old Football axiom of, “the best defense is a strong offense.” We need to stand alongside President Bush on permanent tax cuts for all, the War on Terror, our Troops, the economy, all the areas he has showed success. We need to ignore the Dems as they cry about the failures or other areas where even we disagree with him. Above all, we better get united and stop worrying about little matters while the Dems succeed in implementing Saul Alinsky’s simple formula for success, "Agitate + Aggravate + Educate + Organize."

It seems I recall a line somewhere that said, “America, land of the free, home of the brave.” Will we lose the first part of that as well? Stand up, Republicans. Show some spine. Your constituents cannot do it all for you.

Above all, stop playing nice with those that are going for your jugular.



Anonymous said...

The homosexual Demrats are eager to raise the white flag. Their Party is so lacking in values that they would gladly give up the freedoms of our Nation in order to preserve their right to practice their filthy 'alternative lifestyles'. It's far past the time we need to purge the Republcan Party of these homosexual deviants.

LewWaters said...

Nathan, not every Gay person is an “activist.” Just because a group of activists proclaims themselves Republican doesn’t actually mean they are, either. We are a divided citizenry today, but not that definitively divided, yet.

As for Gay ‘deviancy,’ yes, it is a ‘deviant’ lifestyle in that it would be a deviation from my lifestyle. It isn’t for me; I have no desire to even try it. But, I also have no right to live someone else’s life for them my own is difficult enough.

I will not discuss sexual acts with you as far too many heterosexuals engage in the same acts. Are they too “sick in the head?”

But, if you feel it is way past time to “purge the party of these homosexual deviants,” where does the purge end? Shall we go after adulterers too? What about masturbators? What about those who view pornography in any form? Will it get down to those that smoke or violate traffic laws as well?

The Republican Party isn’t made up of lily-white purists, never has been, never will be.

In the mean time, while you are so intent on cleansing an imperfect party of imperfect supporters, the Democrats succeed in implementing the very deviant policies that even Gays in our midst oppose.

And, what do you end up with? A pure party of yourself and warily looking at the other two that passes your muster.

We have far more important battles facing us than what adults do privately with other adults. We all will receive judgment in the final end by a far greater Judge than those demanding purges today.

u∃∃l!∃ said...

Just Because you don't agree with the Democratic Party values, does not mean they lack values.
They have values that differ from yours.
They value taking care of the less fortunate (economic reality may be missing from some of their ideals, but that differs from not having values).

I have no issues with Homosexuals who keep to themselves. I have some issues with the agenda of trying to push it as "normal".
It is not "normal".
However, Multi-partner relationships (heterosexual or homosexual) are far more of a health threat than single partner relationships.
Men who seek prostitutes are far more of a health threat than homosexual couples.

The only reason the homosexual republicans get so much negative press, is that they tend to be individuals who have openly opposed homosexuality. Otherwise their sexual orientation would not make for interesting news.

Lew, yes we should go after adulterers instead of homosexuals.
There is an obvious victim.
And we should go after those who violate traffic laws as well, as there is the possibility of this causing another individual harm.
Smokers can fry their lungs if they want, just don't ask me to pay to repair them.

So we agree on multiple things, including the fact that the current batch of Republican Politicians lack courage.

At least Bill and Hillary have courage. They are also very intelligent.
They may lack values, but find me a candidate that has courage, intelligence and values honesty.
My guess is that such individuals do not survive more than one term in any political office.

LewWaters said...

Coboble, you said, yes we should go after adulterers instead of homosexuals.
There is an obvious victim.

Neither is currently against the law and both can produce victims. In the case of Curtis, his homosexual act victimized his family and I’m sure when the Divorce Courts get finished with him, he will be a lot poorer.

But, my point is, there are also Gay Democrats in our legislature up here. I never read intricate details of their mishaps or private life. In the case of Curtis, was it really necessary for an article a day for 5 days, even after his resignation? Yesterday’s article was headlined, “La Center ponders politician’s actions.” Once into the article, residents queried said things like, “What he chose to do didn't affect me,” “The national news organizations should find more interesting things to do,” “It's his personal issue, not mine,” “I don't think people really care, It's nobody's business except for him and his family.”

Only one or two seemed to think it was anything of big deal.

Earlier, an article from the Columbian seemed to take issue that Curtis was “lawyered up.” Hello!!!! Who in public life or even private life that retains an attorney is told to go out and speak freely?

Incidentally, it isn’t that Republicans “openly opposed homosexuality,” but that we tend to oppose special rights for Gays like same-sex marriage or hate speech crimes. That is why they have become targets, as admitted to. Contrary to their claims, though, it isn’t hypocritical for one to speak and vote their mind. Why is it that they feel all Gays must fall into their group think and support the Gay agenda? Are they not deciding what others must think or do now?

You also said, Smokers can fry their lungs if they want, just don't ask me to pay to repair them.”

Does this extend down to motorcycle riders, bungee jumpers, parachutists, children with Down’s syndrome, those that eat or drink fattening foods, people that don’t perform appropriate exercise or are born in less that sanitary conditions? Where does “don’t ask me to pay for it” end?

Besides, aren’t smokers paying exorbitant taxes to pay for their own and others medical already and facing even more tax increases, while being shoved away from even private places? All to “help children of the working poor,” of course, ignoring the fact (listed by the American Heart Association) that the vast majority of smokers are the “Working Poor.”

At least Bill and Hillary have courage. They are also very intelligent.

I don’t know if I would classify what they have as courage. More like excessive ambition, arrogance and an unnatural quest for power. While both may be intelligent, only B.J. seems to have the charisma needed to pull it off.

find me a candidate that has courage, intelligence and values honesty.

You may disagree with his values, but check out Duncan Hunter. It is a shame that the lamestream media has decided to ignore his message, a message dear to conservatives.

u∃∃l!∃ said...

Even if I don't agree completely with a candidate's views,
IF they are not too far off base, on the issues most important to me (economics, defense, the trade off between prosperity, the health of the earth and respect for the resources of other countries, the trade off between being powerful and being a bully) and they have integrity, courage, and the intelligence to figure out complex issues (both political and scientific) they have a reasonable chance of getting my vote.
But in the end, I rarely vote for a major party candidate.

You are correct, smokers already pay more than enough tax to cover their medical costs. But the taxes are being stolen and used for other things.

Perhaps if government is going to subsidize medical (which is already being done for some); they should offer deductions for not smoking, and keeping ones body fat below a certain percent, and staying fit.
But if they really care about the health of the people, more than filling the pockets of those with power, they should stop subsidizing corn syrup and tobacco.
Why do highly processed foods cost so much less than fresh vegetables?

As far as kids with Downs, it is not a choice they made.

I think that if we are going to subsidize medical, we have a right to require motorcycle helmets.
Or even better, require insurance, and let the insurance company have their "helmet required" clause, as many now have. Then let the person know, if they fail to wear a helmet, they will not be repaired at tax payer or insurance company expense. But if they want to sell a kidney to cover the cost, they are free to do that (assuming an adult).

If a politician is homosexual, and has not made a big deal out of others being such (in condemning the practice) it should be non-news.

A homosexual act, by a married person falls in the adultery category, as far as having a victim goes.

If I was making the laws, I would make a health law, that made it against the law to not be honest with every sex partner about every other sex partner.

Hillary may have less courage than I thought. But the verdict is still out.

LewWaters said...

Coboble, none of us have a favorite candidate that we are in 100% agreement with, me included. As for voting for third party candidates, until such time as we have a strong and viable third party, a vote for them is a wasted vote. In essence, that is how Clinton won both time, by Ross Perot drawing votes away from the GOP.

While anyone has the perfect right to do that, look what we ended up with because of it.

As for the high cost of fresh vegetables, look back at our discussion on Cesar Chavez and the wage and benefit increase he obtained for farm workers. All of that contributes to increased prices at the grocery store and the purchase of more food from other countries as well as the need for illegal aliens to do the work for less now. A vicious circle, for sure.

I’ve already said I disagree with subsidies. Well meaning, but like most government programs, ineffective and they end up hurting many.

Mentioning of motorcycle riders and others wasn’t about requirements on them, but that they are a dangerous activity as well. Yet, who is complaining about them and demanding higher taxes and harsh restrictions on them?

As for Gays, unlike some conservatives, I really don’t have a problem with them, in or out of the closet. It is the in your face Gays that irritate me. Their conduct is over the top and as I have asked many that know I do not support same-sex marriage, what benefit is it to society to change marriage more than they have already?

Yes, I see what Curtis did as adultery too, but since it isn’t against the law, it becomes a matter between him and his family, much like with Clinton. Personally, I think the GOP was very foolish in going after him for impeachment over the lie about Monica. There were far more serious crimes he seems implicated in that just got lost by the wayside and the GOP stood there with egg on their face over the House impeachment vote.

If that was a leak from the Clinton administration, it was a brilliant political move to draw the attention away from filegate, white Watergate, travel office gate, Mena air field and a whole host of others. Apparently, it worked.

As for the law you mentioned, another example of well meaning effort that would most likely backfire. The Supreme Court ruled against States Sodomy Laws and that alone could end up falling under that ruling. Even if not, it would be too late to imprison or fine someone who didn’t inform partners of any STDs after they infected some others.

Laws are only effective if the people actually follow them.