As I hear about the DNC convention this week, I wonder about Democrats and their priorities. Much of what comes out of their mouths contradicts other statements. Many of those who listen to and fawn over what they say extend courtesies to Democrats that they would never extend to Republicans. In fact, when called out for doing this today, those of my Facebook friends who did so seemed upset to be called for hypocrisy.
The more I watch the Democrat party, the more it appears led by emotion than reason. In order to incite and drum up support, they engage in conduct that gets an emotional outburst. Republicans hate women, old people and the sick. Republicans only like you if you're rich. Never mind that the Democrat keynote speaker was an impeached pervert who takes every liberty with women and that the President cut money from Medicare. Never mind that the Obamas and Pelosis and Reids are themselves rich. Apparently, to hear them talk, they hate themselves, but they love money more than they hate being rich.
From where I sit, they need to sort out their priorities. I learned Obama didn’t have money for shoes or a car that wasn’t rusted out but always had money for drugs. Apparently Obama didn’t have money for school or time for friends, but there was always plenty of both for drugs. I learned that Michelle thinks it's more important kind of success to make a difference than to be rich. Well, Ted Bundy and Ghenghis Khan made a difference. Does that make them successful? Democrats cast out these vague statements that can be used in whatever way serves your purposes.
Then their supporters rationalize what they do. When Michelle makes a statement about success, it immediately gets dressed up in fancy fonts on image sharing servers and blasted out to the social networking world. Nevermind that Emerson wrote a better and more inclusive poem. Nevermind if Ghenghis Khan or Ted Bundy or Mitt Romney also said it. They are caught up in the identity of the speaker rather than the truth of the message. If Romney had said it (he might have; I didn't listen to him either), I doubt very much it would get the social networkinge exposure that Michelle's statements will. If it's truth, the speaker should matter very little.
Democrats do what suits their ends. The ends always justify the means, and so they insist on having it their way. Voting on the amendment to restore a vague reference to God in the party platform, the mayor of LA voted thrice until he got the answer he wanted. Even then, it sounded to me like the delegates rejected the addition of God and Jerusalem to their platform. There's elsewhere a statement about how much the Democrats appreciate and value people of faith. They do not value people of faith. They put up with us if we cast our votes ‘correctly’. They allow us to talk as long as we pass on what they like and say. Otherwise, they view us as a threat and condescendingly refer to how we cling to our bibles.
No matter how much they talk about reason, the democrats act on emotion. While they fear what "might" happen if Romney is elected, they turn a blind eye to the misery and setbacks that are the Obama administration. While they balk when others compare them to the Nazis, it's ok for them to cast that aspersion on others. What they are doing is violating a basic tenant of civil society- Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness Against Thy Neighbor. As long as they flagrantly and reliably violate what establishes and preserves civil society, they cannot possibly facilitate or uphold one. That's not logical.
I care less about who is right than what is right. I care less about who has prosperity than I do about how many people prosper. I care less about getting credit than I do about reaching goals and fulfilling my promises. The Democrats claim the same thing, but apparently, they need "four more years" despite being in absolute control from 2008 to 2010. What was stopping them? If they're right, how come their ideas haven't worked? They sell us a panacea, and then people swoon at the feet of the god of emotion and cast aside all reason for hope. And they say we're the fools for believing in a better world. At least my treasure isn't here where moth and rust corrupts. Sometimes faith is the more reasonable position.
No comments:
Post a Comment