Our new (and perhaps old?) comments troll has made an appeal to reasonable discussion as a means to bridging disagreement. All very reasonable and 1990s in outlook.
Yet for all the fair words, it's impossible at this late date to take them seriously.
In the first case, anyone wishing to learn more about 'the right' would likely choose a far more consequential blog than this fading relic, where a good weeks sees maybe three posts.
However, there is a truly massive archive, where such a person could - through careful reading - learn much about the evolution of non-establishment conservative thought. Certainly we have better things to do that repeat arguments that are readily available.
But in the larger sense, dialogue is pointless because the Democrats have unmistakably signaled that they are done talking and ready to impose their will by any means necessary.
This became clear under Obama, when Democrats nakedly used their power in the teeth of public opposition and in violation of long-standing tradition to obtain what they assumed would be permanent gains. Thus, in the quest to dominate the judiciary, the Senate filibuster was cast aside. Similarly, the long-standing tradition of bipartisan support of major legislation was trashed in order to put Obamacare into effect - even going so far as to jam the bills through on Christmas Eve.
The Democrats knew they were flirting with electoral suicide, but such considerations were secondary to the belief that they would fundamentally alter the American political landscape. Winning was all they cared about.
So it is today. The Dems will trash anything that gets in their way. How quaint is it to recall the Democrat opposition to the PATRIOT Act in light of how they used it to spy on - and undermine - the Trump administration! The FBI and CIA - once deeply distrusted by the civil libertarian left - now are given full license to lie about warrants and use thug tactics to jail political enemies on specious charges.
Which is a weird posture to take for a party that claims to oppose "over-incarceration."
Perhaps the clearest signal that debate is pointless is the Democrats' reversion to using moral arguments instead of logical ones.
This not only frees them from having to explain the practical effect of implementation, it also absolves them from responsibility for any unfavorable results.
For example: de-policing in Democrat cities has produced a surge of crime, shootings and death.
By any objective measure - improving safety, protecting the lives of black people - the policy has failed.
But since it is a moral imperative, these injuries or deaths are but collateral damage on the path to Utopia.
The last time this happened was regarding slavery - when the Democrats of the 1840s shifted from defending slavery as regrettable but necessary into a positive moral good.
It is eerily similar to the move from Bill Clinton's claim that abortion should be 'safe, legal and rare,' to 'shout your abortion!' campaigns, and concurrent lawsuits to force Catholic hospitals to perform the murderous act.
A true dialogue takes place where both sides are open to new ideas and new opinions. For Democrats, this is an impossibility. When they speak of 'national dialogues,' they mean that everyone else has to listen to them until they are tired of talking and then do what they say.
Not long ago, one could expect nominal Catholics like Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden to denounce the attacks on Catholic churches and monuments, but their silence (and even outright denial) speaks volumes.
Indeed, a previous concern troll tried to argue that Antifa didn't exist, ignoring the prominent displays of their symbols, banners, and social media accounts claiming to speak for them.
The first place for such a dialogue to begin is therefore the admission of reality: Antifa is a violent, leftist domestic terrorist organization. If such agreement is impossible, there is nothing left to discuss.
So, are you fellas the Hutus or the Tutsis here?
Posted by: RushLimbaughsCancer | August 14, 2020 at 08:47 PM