Archive

Tag Archives: conservatives

3 pane strip 032616

Today’s red meat loving right-wing base doesn’t mind hearing terrible things about Muslims, immigrants and anyone else they decided they don’t like. But when outrageous talk provokes outrageous action, , they won’t bother looking in the mirror or at their leaders for answers. Instead violence only provokes more violence and their leaders will be the ones clamoring to bring it to them.

Engagement has always been the way to quiet the angry rumblings of international animosity. Winning hearts and minds was never accomplished through violence. But most in the grassroots right-wing conservative movement don’t even know the difference between Sikhs and Muslims and often mistake them for one another. How can they be expected to vote for leaders who claim to understand the nuanced way to deal with a culturally different and population? They just want to vote for people who preach violence and intolerance.

The reason we have freedom of religious is not only to protect the religious group, but to prevent discord within the population in general. Antagonizing an entire group of people, especially religious fanatics, is a great way to provoke a response and we need to collectively come to that realization.

In the last decade, it seems that terror attacks just prior to elections have become all the rage. It’s almost becoming a regular expectation even when it doesn’t happen. As a population of intelligent and calm-minded people, we need to learn to expect such atrocities in today’s environment and not over-react to even the most terrible of provocations. If we can’t do that, then the bad guys win – the war mongers among us who would rather steal power through antagonistic methodologies and violence, and those who perpetrate the violence by provoking the reactions they set out to provoke.

For months now people on both sides of the political spectrum have been handwringing about how to beat Donald, or whether he might beat himself. The Republicans will be the first to fall by virtue of the fact that they meet Donald head-on in primary season but make no mistake – the Democrats will have to face him soon enough.

To just about everyone in the media, the circus turned serious contender has been nothing short of a jaw gaping mystery. You mean a total outsider with a loud mouth and ridiculous policy positions hasn’t been laughed out of the race? What about Michelle Bachmann, Todd Akin and Sarah Palin? That’s what’s supposed to happen to these kinds of people!

But lo, Trump has managed to elude the grip of death that has doomed so many before him leaving the media in their collective confusion to wonder about their own relevancy in this new, bizarre world. How does this end? And if I can’t predict the future with any reasonable degree of accuracy on this roller coaster, what good am I to anyone as a pundit?

But there is a simple answer, and that answer is to ignore the 3 Bs (bullying, bloviating and bombast) and forcefully return the conversation to one focused exclusively on policy. Donald can be beaten on policy, but if he’s allowed to run his entire campaign using the 3 Bs, he’ll control the news and the election.

Imagine for a moment a match-up in a general election between President Obama and Donald Trump. How would President Obama handle Trump and his 3 Bs? Obama wouldn’t get caught up in Donald’s web of nonsense. He would stick to the policy discussion, ignore personal attacks, and beat Trump by discussing his positions. The problem we’ve had this election cycle is that Trump has figured out that if he talks about waterboarding, carpet bombing, Losers and Megyn Kelly, he doesn’t have to talk about healthcare, minimum wage, gay marriage, or how he’s really going to handle Putin in the Ukraine, or North Korea, or Iran. Pulling back the curtain is the way to expose Trump to the middle of the road voters who decide every election.

At the end of the day, Trump is a showman who has relied on smoke and mirrors to drown out his competition. But his co-campaigners have also allowed Trump to control the dialog, flailing away with various tactics in their attempts to dodge the steam roller. Cruz tried by killing Trump with kindness – at least at first. But you can’t win playing a willing second fiddle. Bush tried feebly to stand up to the campus bully with predicable results. He was verbally wedgied out of the race. Rubio is finally putting up a stronger fight, but even if it wasn’t too little too late, it wouldn’t work anyway. You can’t out-3B Donald Trump. You simply need to change the rules back to the default. Get campaigns talking about campaign issues, and not Donald’s latest foray into his beloved mine field of taboos.

But Trump has used the Bs to great advantage and obscured from the public his lack of policy sophistication as his Achilles heel.

Recently Donald mentioned that he’s a fan of Planned Parenthood. This is policy kryptonite that not even Donald can overcome with some of his prospective supporters. If Hillary can find enough policy positions that are untenable to his RINO hating base, he’ll prove himself the closet liberal they are all afraid of, and he’ll lose vital support. Policy, and nothing else will sleigh this dragon, but we need to steer the conversation back from the brink of darkness. If Donald continues to be allowed to control the news cycle with the 3 Bs, he’ll control the election.

 

 

Those leading the Republican party today are total jokes. Punchlines for late night comedians. Fodder for the water cooler. The only qualified republican candidates are being overlooked and ignored by the media and will be forced to withdraw after a while due to lack of funds.

You could read 10 stories about Trump and never see a headline about about Christy, Bush or ummm, who are the other people running?

Perhaps this is a media coup after all? I mean, look what they are talking about in the press. Carson? The guy has a picture of himself with Klingon Jesus and doesn’t know apples from oranges about foreign policy.

And Trump? He’s a showman and a salesman, but NOT a politician who knows anything about policy. He thinks ratings translates into votes. We found out that isn’t true last night when we destroyed by Cruz in Iowa.

And Cruz? How could the most hated man in Washington run Washington effectively? Here’s a hint: he can’t. Can you imagine a president like Cruz? I true ideologue? He’d use executive orders to undo all the positive social changes President Obama worked so hard for. He’d work to ban every single type of abortion. He’d kick millions of people out of health care plans with his promise to repeal Obamacare. He’s a sick man who’s ready to wield power for the betterment of himself and his own personal views, but he definitely won’t be the president for all Americans. Only the staunch right wing bible thumping crew who think the apocalypse is nigh.

These guys are all fatally flawed candidates. They can’t win an election against a normal, center Democrat like Clinton. So my feeling is that the media is pumping them up which makes an easy glide path for a Democrat to take office in 2017. But I’m fine with all of it. And thank goodness. Let’s keep talking about Trump, Cruz and Carson. The more the better! I’ll laugh all the way to November.

TRUMP/PALIN for the republican ticket! smh

The problem with today’s liberals is that we are too busy living in the past. Right-wingers have a leg up in that respect as the party of the future. All the militant talk of purity and liberty and religious freedom is the path forward but liberals are simply too blind to see it. Instead, liberals are busy worried about global warming and international relations when they should be focused inward on our broken and deteriorating wreck of a country which, even as you read this, is surely in its final death throws.

So I have a solution for conservatives to help liberals get with the program. What liberals need is a change of vocabulary to help jossle our confused minds. The words we use have power, and unless we use powerful, accurate, and modern dialog, we liberals will remain behind the curve.

Let’s start with guns because lately there’s a lot of talk of guns in the media. The word ‘gun’ is out-dated. Let’s be honest. A gun conjures images of cold steel, but while accurate, it’s also 19th century and not really representative of today’s mindset. Accordingly, I propose we start calling guns ‘freedom sticks’. After all, what provides our freedom? Our freedom sticks!

Next, let’s talk about victims. First, we liberals need to remember that they are all about victimization. But what a terrible, old-school word! It does nothing to honor the fallen for their sacrifice. It’s weak, frankly, and desperately needs a retrofit from our aging vocabulary. From now on, I suggest conservatives refer to victims of gun violence as ‘the liberated’ to help our uninformed liberal hordes understand the value of freedom sticks.

Moving on to immigrants, the term ‘sovereignty deniers’ comes immediately to mind. Liberals will have a much easier time understanding conservative objections to immigrants if they are called something reasonably descriptive. Sovereignty deniers should be dealt with using freedoms sticks. See how it all comes together?

As a final example, I would suggest conservatives adopt them ‘CEO’ to replace the term ‘God’. We liberals have unwisely made the term God unwelcome in politics, schools, and elsewhere. This is terrible policy, but with all our childish bellyaching about the separation of church and state it has nevertheless come to pass. Still, conservatives know where the real power lies even if they aren’t allowed to say so. All they really need is a change in nomenclature to drive the point home, and who is the ultimate CEO? You guessed it!

All we really need are a few small changes to help our less intelligent neighbors finally see the brilliance of the conservative movement in all its glory. Let’s hope these changes catch on!