Dumbest (uncorrected) Choices in American History: Shortlist

100_0172a

My list of REALLY STUPID CHOICES made in American history; just a short-list I am afraid:

Diet Food” that is more chemicals than food

Having the Soviet Union an “ally” in WWII – better to have let them go it alone; email for full argument

The Electoral College in the Age of Communication; direct election of all offices should be the norm; Political Parties are OBSOLETE and COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE

Public Sector Unions

Adding “under God” to the Pledge making it a point of division instead of unity

Lotus and Apple’s Patent-the-Universe Syndrome making the courts accept patents on things never meant for patent

Failing to live up to Dr. King’s vision and refusing to stop being prejudiced regarding race

Private campaign donations of any kind other than labor

Campaign donations by businesses

Supreme Court deciding that money= a right to a louder voice for YOUR ‘free speech

Dropping the no-partisanship requirements for radio talk-shows and ‘interview’ programs

Letting Lawyers advertise

Supreme Court declaring that nothing of value is earned by the recipient of a military award or decoration

Women’s, Chicano, Black “Studies” propping up people selected, distorted and lionized with blatant prejudice; taking away self-respect while pretending to help by ‘giving the poor things a hand’, and White Studies designed to rip on Western Culture for the same purpose – removing its self-respect – it seems non-whites are too dumb or clueless to run their own lives or stand up to whites and that whites are just intrinsically demonic – welcome to the enlightened world of PC education

Failing to settle on the point in a pregnancy where a woman’s choice is MADE and she must be held responsible for an infant rather than a piece of owned tissue. (6 month preemies regularly survive today and the Radical Right’s agenda on abortion would make women all but chattel)

Worrying more about which consenting adults, what age, color or how many may legally get ‘married’; ignoring the concept of duty, honor and responsibility anyone brings to their marriages

Bilingual Education as a policy

Helmets, knee and elbow-pads for tricycle riders

Peer promotion in school

Affirmative Action after 1990 – where was the transition to color-blind government?

Worrying more about what actual people have DONE with their guns than trying to get law-abiding folk to not have any at all

Electing Andrew Jackson, Jimmy Carter, George W., and Obama

Forgetting that ALL countries do best with immigrants if they pick from the TOP of the pile instead of the bottom

Paying a private group to print/coin money like a product to be bought forgetting that money has no ‘intrinsic’ value’; dollars are just counters for the economic game; increasing or decreasing the supply by fiat to ACCURATELY reflect the production/wealth of a nation is the ONLY reason when deciding when or if to print more money, or let the cash pool contract

Deciding that political consensus and no working model or scientific theory that has been tested is sufficient when making decisions in haste that could wreck the world’s entire economy/infrastructure; in the 70’s it was the next Ice Age that was imminent… no models then either

Making an “eco-friendly” light-bulb containing hazardous amounts of mercury

Adults stealing Halloween from the children and making it another grown-ups party holiday

The Writer’s Strike

ANY serious university or college that “emphasized” sports to make money and enabled ‘tails’ that can wag Great Danes with ease

Guy DeWhitney on Government by Heretics Crusaders

My ideal of government:
Un-self-consciously, individual humans that are raised to feel a profound duty to protect all aspects of seldom/individuality that neither “picks someone’s pocket nor breaks someone’s leg” and a profound respect for the notion that we are all one and what goes around not only comes around, it DIRECTLY affects us; i.e. “successful” assholery damages a psyche’s ability to make ‘good’ choices in the future.Guy DeWhitneys Heretics Crusade

Calling Yourself Liberal and Religious won’t MAKE You a Good Person

PartyPlayFairDemo

Today we have two re-writes of older articles that seem very relevant today:

First, we will take the “Liberals” as well as the “Conservatives” to task for partisan hypocrisy…

Nowadays the word Liberal is often used as a pejorative; I often use it that way myself for good reasons.

Yet I am a moderate, and probably spend about 40% of the time cursing the idiocy of the Left, and 60% of it complaining and worrying about the Right (It is too bad there are not more real conservative minds in the Conservative camp these days.). Of the two the Conservatives tend to scare me a bit more but the Leftists in total power would be/ have been worse. But the actions of the radicals on either side do not condemn entire schools of thought to a mature mind.  This should be remembered by pundits on both sides in this age of attack politics.

 Lately a radically Conservative group has taken over almost all the political voice of conservative American Christianity.  They have used their pulpit to propound, and pound in, their own view of history, and how Christianity has influenced the development of the United States as a nation.

 They are not actually lying about the influence of the churches. The problem is that they have forgotten from just where in the Church all that influence came.  Yes, it was those damn liberals every time!

 In American history, every time the religious culture has had a profound positive influence (as judged by successive generations) on changes in society those influences have their roots in the Liberal-to-Radical churches. They most certainly did not come from the Conservative ones!

 The Conservative Churches in every case have held the line with the status quo through history whether it was regarding the Revolution, slavery, child labor, workers rights, racial equality or now, gay rights.  Yet the Conservative Churches of today want to shine their halos with the contributions made for the most part by the Liberal Churches of the past.

This activity is not unique to Christianity by any means.  A Radical Conservative Jew will spend much energy telling you about Judaism’s amazing contributions to Western society, but will refuse to see that his brand of thinking never produced any of it.  Find a Conservative Imam, and you will find a man eager to convince you that Islam has been an enormously positive contributor to civilization over the centuries.  But if you remind him that blind faithfulness to Islam’s Conservative philosophy had nothing to do with the various periods of (heretically liberal) Islamic glory that he is polishing up for you to admire; he may even take offense.

  In every case where religious and political power intermingle the things that modern world civilization would call progress has only come when the dominant Church(s) is(are) liberal to the point of being heretical (to the parent dogmas and doctrines), tolerant and more focused on understanding, accepting and spreading the “love behind the Law” rather than promoting a zero-tolerance attitude regarding adherence to the “Letter of the Law.”

But only stagnation and decay ensue when the Churches are conservative and cling to a memory, or fictitious ideal, of “the way it should be.”

 It should be noted that Conservative religious thought can have a greatly positive influence on society but, that usually the effects remain chiefly negative.

 Witness: the defense of slavery, and the stances of “Godly” preachers and priests against child labor laws, and minority civil rights laws.

Witness: the attempts at forced, coerced and violent conversions directed at any people of another religion that are under the influence of a politicized religion (theocracies, inquisitions, shari’a states).

 We all admit that Conservatism is designed to be highly successful at keeping the wheels of a society turning. Who but a fool will deny that there is a true virtue most times in maintaining most of the status quo; Leftists take note of the qualifications and keep your straw men to yourselves – I am not Christian, and never have been a Republican, or supporter of either Bush.

 But, it also must be admitted that Conservative governments and organizations have a poor track record when attempting to grease those wheels, to make accommodation for the fact that seems “odd“, “weird“, “different” to the average mind; whether the ideas are good ones or not!

When the going gets rough or to be a creative inspiration for the people who bear the main burdens of pushing the cart of civilization further, faster and safer than our ancestors ever believed it could go Conservatives can be of more a drag chain when they should be acting like the regenerative brakes that go with a hybrid engine.

 Conservative ideology certainly does not allow real flaws in the basic social system to be changed without a protracted, and often ugly, fight with the liberal mindset who are busy finding things that are not really broken to make into really nasty situations with well-meaning new laws and more, and more, and more tension from enforcement, and less and less elbow room for the well-intentioned citizen just trying to get along and improve their lives.

 Without a Liberal element in society, one that has enough influence to smack the current bosses on the head now and then but, not enough to dominate society  a person lives in what is at best a well upholstered slave camp destined to fade into the dust of history.

And…

Without a Conservative element at the core to give perspective and balance a people will… well, just look at the aftermath of every single revolution in the past – the American revolution was actually a colony revolt – it was an independently evolving, functioning society that broke away from the parent nation/culture rather than an indigenous movement to topple all the central power structures and replace them ad hoc with unproven or dis-proven but, “much better” institutions; not long after they succeed the real bloodshed is just beginning!

 Who was it again that decreed with proven ‘Holy Authority‘ that all human problems can, and may, only be solved by a totally Left-wing or totally Right-wing ideology? When did admitting that your Party’s platform cannot solve all problems if followed by “good” people?

The voting public needs to take off their trendy, strait-jackets/sheep-outfits, grow up, and look at reality – of the real kind, rather than the oh-so-importantly-unimportant political sort – and then find the ideal solutions, not the solutions that serve your political tribe while walking over everyone else’s Lives’, Liberties, and frantic Pursuits of Happiness.

Leftists and Right-wingers Conspire Against Constitutional Government

hypocrite_fish

I am a bit disappointed in the both the Left and the Right; no-one seems to know how to declare victory and move on, or realize the futility of their actions and let go.

There is a certain similarity to those who are gravitated toward the amassing of political power; for the most part their agenda is not the one they publically serve, instead it is one of ego and power, narcissism and insecurity.  The occasional sincere and talented leader that comes along is a happy accident in the purposeful insanity in pursuit of power we call politics.

On the Right we have people who do not seem to be able to accept that  how a person dresses or wears their hair, what books or films they enjoy, which adult they fall in love with, what kind of music they listen to, or which particular chemicals they choose to soothe themselves with against outrageous fortune matters little compared to issues that breaks their leg or picks their pockets.

This is principally because a conservative mindset supports the status quo against disruption from “outside; it is hard to tell who is not “one of us” if we fail to look alike and act alike.

On the Left we have those folks who simply cannot let go of the rush of having been on the side of “Truth and Light” against the monolithic “Man; if some group quacks like victims of “oppression” the Left immediately labels it a duck, turning a blind eye to any “regretful but vital temporary irregularities” committed in the pursuit of “social justice.”

Today it seem that to the new breed of “liberal” any traditional or overly familiar group is automatically suspected of evil intent and attacked; meanwhile any foreign, unfamiliar or new ideology is seen as persecuted, helpless, and in need of protection; they are not shy about shaming others into “doing the right thing“; even if they would call their actions evil if perpetrated by a non-Leftist.

The sign that makes this cognitive-dissonance the most obvious to me is the seeming inability of anyone belonging to a partisan group to see their own leaders engaging in hypocrisy or toxically self-serving politics.

Case in point Left:

Three distinguished ‘sociologists‘ having a panel discussion at a prestigious, elite university on the cumulative emotional/political scars of the “Palestinian people” who never even mention the existence of the PA, PLO, Fatah or any non-Israeli leadership, organisation or government!

Case in point Right:

Every bill that is passed by a conservative state legislature regarding abortion or the first amendment that they know will be thrown out by the Supreme Court on a “No Duh” basis; not to mention voting against humane laws only because the law might, possibly, in theory, in a Blue Moon and with a tail wind undermine their goal of passing other laws designed to eliminate the right to any abortions.

Case in point Left:

The partisan Leftie will bend their brain into a pretzel to justify and declare natural and normal any deviant behavior practiced by consenting adult homosexuals while at the same time denigrating the “un-naturally” traditional sexual tastes of more conservative folk, most of whom are not interested in regulating the homosexuals’ lifestyle beyond the usual restrictions on anyone committing rape, pedophilia or other criminal activity.

Case in point Right:

The partisan Rightie will get their panties in a twist contemplating all the heinous and disgusting sexual crimes a homosexual “could” be prone to while ignoring rampant child abuse in the home, or a culture of rape in an institution; that homosexuals in reality have a lower violent crime rate than straights seems to totally escape them.

Case in point Left:

Lefties just hate women who like the idea of having babies and being a homemaker, they simply loathe it! When you pin them to the wall, as happened recently when someone said that Mitt Romney’s wife who raised five sons and battled a deadly illness had never worked a day in her life, they mostly admit that there is nothing wrong and much that is admirable, about a “non-working” home-maker. Then a few days later they will once again say something that denigrates mothers.

Case in point Right:

Statistics show that the highest divorce rates, the highest teen STD rates and the highest teen pregnancy rates all occur in precisely the same areas where the most conservative sex-ed is the norm and sex is only supposed to happen after a person gets married. But, the lowest rates for divorce etc. are found amongst agnostics and secular Jews! I will leave as an exercise for the student the contemplation of reasons why two people with no clue whether they are socially compatible in the long term, or if they are sexually compatible at all, might be a bad risk for marrying; living together first is a  statistically proven better strategy!

Both sides seem to feel that all the worlds problems are sourced in the opposition’s intentionally perverse and stubborn need to fuck everything up for the other guy; I have more faith in my fellow man than that, but the partisanship has got to go!

Why Does MY Party Need Ethics Laws? WE Are The GOOD GUYS!

26812208v2_225x225_Front

Partisans suck on both sides!

Anyone who thinks their party is somehow less corrupt in its own way than the “opposition” deserves whatever idiots they elect!
Classic Liberals hold up as an ideal the underdog successfully gaming a corrupt system; the Conservatively oriented uphold the concept of WORKING the, not perfect but necessary, system for success.

But, the Leftist believes that “The System”, or “The Man” is ALWAYS inimical; while a Liberal understands that this is something to be guarded against while not an inherent facet of all “authority.”

The Right-winger holds the belief that those within the system are somehow protected from being abusive, and corrupt within the rules…
Obviously these are both utter fallacies!

Leftists seek to game the system; to use self-righteousness as a champion of “the downtrodden and powerless” as an excuse to do things that would make their blood boil if attempted by “the other side”!

Liberal thought respects the gaming of the system by truly oppressed folk, while also respecting the honesty and integrity of those in the majority who play by the rules of the healthy systems to prosper.

But the “leadership” of “Left” and “right” promote the idea that THEIR fantasy is the ONLY valid attitude, and the only one that DECENT people would follow.

I have TWO things to say to both mentalities; the 2nd thing I want to say to them is…”and the horse you rode in on”!

http://hereticscrusade.com

Fairness Doctrine is NOT a “Leftwing” Idea!

fairness

I think that in the end Obama will make G.W. look like the best thing since sliced bread BUT, I remember when talk radio was a place where you could LEARN about things and THINK about them, not just gulp down some predigested, group-thunked, sheeple fodder from BOTH sides!

Keeping media free and objective is one of the MOST important ways we can protect our entire society, on both sides!

And while we are at it let’s go back and beef up the media ownership rules!
NO individual or corporate entity should be allowed to own more than ONE outlet of each media type in any one locale.

The only folks who do NOT support that idea are the very ones who seek to under abuse">abuse the concept and impose their mindset on the masses merely by buying enough "airtime" to drown out other voices!

Obama shakes out the Dems


(HH here: Well I am finally ready to admit it. My natural optimism and tendency to give the benefit of the doubt have been fully and totally replaced by a sad reality confirmed.

During the election I looked at all that was presented by the nominally sane…and was not troubled. Obama seemed like he might grow from a politician to an actual statesman. He seemed to be a Left of Center Liberal. The few bits of truly shocking info was either from radical Right sources or was simply too hard for us to swallow whole; things like the Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers et al. But Obama said that Ayers was just a guy in the background of his childhood, never close, never a friend.

But toward the end of the election troubling news began to come out of repression of dissent in Orwellian fashion as well as an anti-Clinton supporter purge. The only Clintonions to survive were those on the far Left it seems by now.

In the early days of his presidency he did little, but many of those little things seemed like the right things. When drone strikes in Pakistan continued and Obama authorized the rescue with violence of the captives of Somali pirates he seemed to be proving his moderate ways.

Now Obama still does little. Except to talk more than any recent President. And to demonize any who disagree with his policies. And lie. Or at the least distort in his favor to an extent only exceeded by Communist commissars.

Meanwhile anti-Israel chic becomes the default position for far too many high ranking figures in his administration. Meanwhile out and out Marxist after Marxist is exposed in his administration. Meanwhile Obama is co-sponsoring U.N. resolutions the enforcement of which would violate the First amendment!! Meanwhile the leader of a major Marxist publication is advising the FCC on tech law, and Obama himself! Meanwhile Obama claims that ACORN and its fall are not even on his radar…and implies they should not be on any major media’s radars either! Meanwhile Obama sits for over a month on a vital report regarding troops for Afghanistan. Then stalls some more when the report is leaked. Then says that the “vital war” of his candidacy suddenly does not need to be won. There are just too many meanwhiles.

There are just too many “whose side is he on’s and too many people (like Iranians) asking “Where’s Obama?” when they look for American support even if it is only words.
From his training at ACORN (which he pretends didn’t happen) to the new proof that his “distant acquaintance” Bill Ayers at the LEAST co-wrote “Fathers” with Obama to all the avowed Marxists and radicals (NAMBLA association for crying out loud???) he has appointed to posts that are significant in power but un-confirmed (or vetted) by Congress.

Just too many strange things to give more benefits of doubt. Too many things to deny any longer that just as Bush was a Right-Wing tool that hornswoggled a lot of Conservative voters so Obama has hidden his Left-wing (that means Communist not Liberal Virginia, look it up) agenda and associates under a guise of moderate Liberalism.

Liberal and Conservative are constructive ways to look at healthy political thought. Leftism and Rightism are just different tactics to impose total control based on a “revealed Truth” on a given society.

I consider myself strongly Liberal, I respect no convention or tradition that does not show respect for the concepts of individual rights, worth and equality under the law; the hallmarks of Liberal thought. But at the same time I hold Conservative views on aspects of our culture that work and have been shown to work time and again. Things like the separation of Church and state, free speech, free press and freedom of religion and the checks and balances of the Constitution.

Each new issue I examine with a Liberal heart that has an eye to not disrupt social conventions that work and work well. Things like the convention of marriage itself. I happen to think that it can mean a lot more than one man and one woman but the institution itself is a universal Human one from the depths of time. I see no reason to end it or alter it beyond the limits of how many consenting adults of which sexes can participate.

On the other hand the Rightist is sure in their bones that their society is the best it can be when all is said and done and any attempts to disrupt the status quo are treason regardless of the merit. To follow the revealed religious truth is to please God and so any worry about “morality” is moot in the light of your righteousness. We see this attitude today in hard core radical Christians as well as far too many Muslims.

To the Leftist society is an experiment that must be run mercilessly along the lines of a revealed Truth. Until all of society is run along these lines in toto there are to be expected “disruptions” and “negative influences” that will result in “unfortunate” responses by the State. But worry not, when the Truth is finally shoved down each and every throat and every “citizen” is afraid to deviate THEN paradise on Earth will prevail….They promise! To get there we must first dismantle ALL existing non-“True” institutions without mercy and clear fallow ground to build the new republic.

The right path is usually taken by Religious groups seeking political power, Radical Christians, Conservative Muslims etc…while the Left path is the province of Atheists and Agnostics who are not seriously ready to let go of a personal God. They invent new Human gods to follow to heaven or Hell: People like Stalin, Pol Pot, Hitler and the current and former leaders of North Korea.

Yet toe to toe they are equaled by those produced by the “religious” mentality; Can Osama Bin Laden or fanatical Christian leaders of the past (over three hundred years ago during the religious wars) show any difference from the atheistic group than a lack of modern weaponry?

Liberals and Conservatives need to stop treating each other like enemies and see how similar they are. I do not know any Conservatives that do not agree with “Liberal” advances like Blacks and women voting and holding equal rights. I do not know any Liberals that do not appreciate the benefits of a good family or strong, fair laws that hold people responsible for how they affect other people. But you will find Leftists and Rightists who will argue each of those points with a vengeance and refuse any compromise since they hold the “Truth”.

God (or Goddess) help us all to promote the Conservative! To promote the liberal! And not to fall into Leftist or Rightist traps of hate and self-righteousness! Or may we do it without any gods at all….but let us do it and soon!

My hope is that this detour into Obamaland will simply shake out as many of the Leftists hiding in the Democrats as the trek to Bushville shook out Rightwing nuts in the Republicans.

And Libeals need to learn the difference between the Right Wing actions(deciding to invade Iraq) and the Conservative ones; MOST of the patriot act. while Conservatives learn the difference between Leftist and Liberal; quick check for Conservatives, if something feels good and does NOT contradict long standing Constitutional opinion it is probably Liberal.If it feels good on the surface but is a de facto middle finger to the concept of equality under the law for all and unfair in order to be “fairer” then it is Leftist.

The end result should be a Democratic party that remembers what Liberal means and starts to apply it again.

I hope.)

Why do I call myself a both Moderate and Liberal?


(HH Here: As things stand today the words Liberal and Leftist are often used as though they mean the same thing. That is about like saying that the terms Conservative and Jingoist are also interchangeable. Come to think of it that is how BOTH sets of words are used today. Jingoists are branding anyone Liberal with the label Leftist and Leftists demonize anyone who is at all Conservative as a Jingoistic Chauvinist.

So, before we discuss the ever to be feared Leftists and Jingoists let us first discuss what a Liberal and a Conservative truly are.

Dictionary.com says that to be Liberal is to be:
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.

2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.

3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.

4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.

5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.

6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.

7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners. (HH: Simple note to the vocabulary impaired; Prejudice and bigotry require a person to IGNORE factual data to come to their conclusions about others i.e. it is NOT bigotry to dislike people like Nazis and Supremacists and others who are demonstrably inimical.)

8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc. (Another note for the Leftists, Not bound means you can CHOOSE to go beyond tradition and convention IF it seems desirable, the Liberal is not REQUIRED to abandon them whenever possible.)

9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: a liberal donor.

10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation.

11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule.
(This last one is why so many “liberal” reforms have had their impetus from religious folk. Those who interpret their religion with Love see things that those who see God as a legalistic prig cannot. It was not the “Conservative” churches that supported the reform of Slavery or child labor or minority civil rights, it was always the Liberal Churches that spearheaded the way. The Conservative Churches fought tooth and nail until the “Liberal” ways became common wisdom because of the fear-mongering of their resident jingoists who magnified the threat to “Biblical Authority” in each case. Now each cause is embraced in toto by all but the most radical of Rightwing Churches.

Mr. Hill over at Fox and other unreconstructed Leftists should take note that this definition does NOT say a word about radicals or revolutions or Marxism.

O.K. that is pretty clear. So what then is a “Leftist” if they are NOT a “Liberal” you might ask? The short answer is that a Leftist is more or less a Marxist. But I do not think that the short answer will suffice in this forum so let us delve a little deeper.

Back we go to Dictionary.com or any other standard English dictionary:

1. a member of the political Left or a person sympathetic to its views.

O.k. then, what is the “political Left”?

Wikipedia.org has this to say: “In politics, left-wing, political left, leftist and the Left are terms used to describe a number of positions and ideologies. They are most commonly used to refer to support for changing traditional social orders or for creating a more egalitarian distribution of wealth and privilege. …

The phrase left-wing was coined during the French Revolution, referring to the seating arrangement in parliament; those who sat on the left supported the republic, the popular political movements and secularization.[1][2] The concept of a distinct political Left originated with the June Days Uprising of 1848. (HH: The totalitarian excesses post revolution were exclusively the result of extreme interpretations of the “Leftist” movement.) The organizers of the First International saw themselves as the successors of the left wing of the French Revolution. The term was applied to a number of revolutionary movements in Europe, especially socialism, anarchism[3] and communism. The term is also used to describe social democracy. In contemporary political discourse, the term the Left usually means either social liberal or socialist.[4]”

Well there you go, Leftism is NOT Liberalism by any definition. Leftism is radical, revolutionary and ultimately has always expressed itself in totalitarian ways to the limits allowed by other elements in a given society. For the Leftist to attempt to cloak themselves by claiming responsibility for the Liberal progress of the past is simply an attempt to put the wolf in sheep’s clothing. To the great peril of the U.S. the Democratic party has won the White house at the very moment a true blue radical Leftist has come to prominence. ACORN and Van Jones et. al. will be seen as just the tip of the iceberg as the people of the U.S. come to grips with the difference between the Liberal and the Leftist.

So, that takes care of the Liberal=Left fantasy, let us now move on to the dreaded Conservative and the even more dreaded Jingoist.

Let us go forth to Dictionary.com again and look up the word Conservative:

1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

2. cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.

3. traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.

4. (often initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Conservative party.

5. (initial capital letter) of, pertaining to, or characteristic of Conservative Jews or Conservative Judaism.

6. having the power or tendency to conserve; preservative.

Well now, that does not sound very bad does it? A Conservative is someone who appreciates the good in tradition and is both slow to accept radical change without good reason and avoids novelty and showiness for their own sake. Doesn’t it sound like the best thing to be might be a person who is Conservative at first but is aware that imperfections need to be dealt with in a Liberal fashion?

Is there anything in that definition that demands that a Conservative never change? Must the Conservative always judge their customs as superior and in need of no reform? There does not seem to be a word about any of that. It just says the Conservative is not reckless or careless or frivolous. Nothing to say you cannot be a somewhat Liberal Conservative nor to forbid a person from being a conservative Liberal.

Both ideologies seem to be about finding the best solutions (or non-solutions for non-problems) for all. The Conservative is more focused on not rushing to mess up what is good without good reason and the Liberal is a bit more focused on making what is wrong right but both have the love of civilization at their heart.

Can you imagine a harmonious, benign society that does not have a healthy presence of BOTH Conservative and Liberal elements keeping things out of the hands of the partisans? I can’t. So why do we follow the mindset of either Rush Limbaugh or Michael Moore? THAT I can’t answer.

But what about those Jingoist people? What are THEY into?

Good old Dictionary.com says this about them:

the spirit, policy, or practice of jingoes; bellicose chauvinism.

Bellicose means: inclined or eager to fight; aggressively hostile; belligerent; pugnacious.

And here is good old Chauvinism:

1. zealous and aggressive patriotism or blind enthusiasm for military glory.

2. biased devotion to any group, attitude, or cause.

Do we really need to break it down any further? To the Bellicose Mind, sure of its group’s purity and righteousness, a mind that wants to see things reformed for harmony is no better than one that seeks the destruction of all that is good and traditional.

To the mind that sees The Society That Is as an evil and unfixable obstacle to be eliminated in order to establish the perfect world to come ANY Conservative thought is a reactionary and evil frustration of the destined, and desired, revolution.

Neither group can ever be trusted to compromise or to co-operate in anything but the destruction of a mutual enemy. And Of course, like the Soviets and Nazis, go at each other again the moment that enemy is down for the count. Sometmes they do not even wait that long and defeat is snatched fromthe jaws of victory as a result.

It is never easy being Moderate. You need to be able to stand up to the Chauvinists attempting to control the Conservatives on one side and the Radicals influencing the Liberals on the other. Each are goo at mouthing the right words to their useful idiots to keep them pulling the wagon.

And each is pretending every Moderate is a proponent of the opposition, instead of a free soul seeking solutions rather than questing for victories.

As a Moderate you will be called the worst things that either set of totalitarians can think of and be accused of every crime each extreme has ever committed. But history shows that while most of the trial and trauma of humanity has come from the Jingoists and Leftists, when the dust settles it is usually the decency and stability of the Liberal Conservative middle that has prevailed. It is what has lead us from the Purdah and slavery of the Early Greeks in imitation of the rest of the “civilized World” to the heights of Western Civilization enjoyed and respected today by all who are not seeking unjust power over others. To those who have love for Mankind and God in their hearts the West is most certainly on the path to where we all want to be.

Indeed all of Western History can be seen as the slow triumph of Moderate thought over the partisans who would tear us all apart into warring tribes for all time.

So ignore the calls to hate the Conservative or the Liberal. See them for what they are, battle cries trying to rally the forces of destruction against those who would build instead.

Look to your home, your family, your culture and be a bit Conservative, then look to find the cracks to be found in the most perfect political creations and let your inner Liberal voice your concerns. Protect what is strong and strengthen what is weak. But above all, wish to do good to each other.

Big Game Hunters Guide to Conservatives and Liberals.

When venturing out into the hostile wilderness of politics seeking a prize for your mantle it is good to know as much as possible about your game.

Conservatives are elusive game. The problem is that they come in three different types. Quite distinct and with different values as trophies.

The first type of conservative to be found on the veldts of D.C. is known as the Business Conservative. The only thing conservative about this creature is it’s suit and home life. Essentially these beasts are of the jackal family existing only to prey on the weak and the old. Much of government regulation is made to deal with the rampages of these beasts. They are hard to winnow out though from other stripes of Conservative as they take on protective coloring to hide their bloodthirsty tendencies. The most notable of this degenerate breed is known as Bernie Madoff.

The Business Conservative is a dragline to progress wherever he or she, is found. On the other hand the very excesses of this breed of scavengers has provoked many laws dealing with things as diverse as child labor and general workplace safety.

Another breed of Conservative is known as the Jesus Freak. This one is also hard to identify with certainty as the B.C. most often disguises himself as one. A number of True Conservatives also can be mistaken for this breed at first glance but will show its true colors with study.

The true Jesus Freak is essentially a theocracy believing heretic of the Christian religion. Their supposed savior and teacher Jesus taught in unequivocal terms several lessons that these critters chose to ignore while striving to create a heretical government in His very name.

The first of these lessons is that prayer in public, especially for a SOCIAL purpose is anathema. The only true prayer to God according to their prophet is in private and just between the Christian and God. He goes on to disapprove the person who prays in order to be SEEN to pray, for social status . Yet we find that “pious” public prayer by individuals and groups is the hallmark of the J.F.!

The Teacher the J.F’s claim also taught that his followers were not supposed to seek a civil government based on His teachings. They were to hold their relationship with God in their hearts, not base the machinery of government on it. This too the J.F. ignores blithely. Many believe the J.F.s to be degenerate Christians while others feel they are more like the B.C.s, a wholly alien breed hiding amongst the real Christians.

The last main species of Conservative is what we choose to all the True Conservative. This is a self reliant individual who has no more desire to interfere with others private affairs than they desire others to interfere in their own. The often are Christian or Jewish but need not be religious at all to follow their herd. In fact they do not tend to homogenous herds but are salted amongst the other breeds of Conservative and even in non-Conservative herding grounds. They tend to be generous but slow to true friendship. Once made however this connection will bear great strain. The True Conservative can be your best friend in times of trouble and won’t trouble you in good times.

The T.C. is a hardy breed that will often be found on the frontiers of society hewing a new path of their own in the wilderness unlike the other two who tend to huddle and herd in “safe” zones that do not challenge their assumptions.

Interestingly this huddling tendency is shared by some of the Liberal breeds as well.
The Liberal herds are much more amorphous compared to the Conservatives. They exist as more of a spectrum than a set of sub breeds. At the far right of this spectrum the Liberal blends imperceptibly into the Moderates and causes few problems. Indeed the Middle Left part of the Liberal herd has been responsible for most of the social “progress” the whole Human race has made.

From the middle of the Liberal herd to the very Left fringes however an strange disorder overtakes the herd. A disorder that is ultimately not usually fatal but always debilitating to not only the Liberal breeds but any others living in close proximity.

This disorder shows itself as a form of self hatred directed at the entire herd in reverse proportion to the herd’s own progress with the disorder. The most infected parts are not attacked at all while non-infected Liberals can be viciously mauled even worse than would a non-Liberal who wandered into their grounds.

The mindset of the Leftmost Liberals is a hard thing for an outsider to distinguish from a J.F.. Both breeds have an overwhelming desire to take their fantasies and impose them as law on all other breeds in the land and will mutilate and maul any who disagree with their “Truth” while claiming the highest moral ground. Both the L.L. and the J.F. seek a totalitarian, essentially fascist society that conforms to their ideal of a “Proper society”. Woe betide any who stand in the way of these subherds when they are on the move.

Please take note that this article only refers to the American breeds. Elsewhere the main breeds also exist but the J.F. can take a number of different forms based on different religions, some of which make the most vicious North American J.F. look like a tame kitten.

Please remember that the T.C. is currently on the endangered list and protected. Also, the law allows you to tag, photograph and release but culling the herds is something we must leave to natural processes.