THE DEMS WAY OF THINKING

[Veritas]

http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/flag17.gif First off does anyone get the dems way of thinking, or to put it straight out there; the liberals way of thinking? well I don't and it drives me nuts... I'll go in to it like this.
I don't understand how they can support sending troops to liberia and not Iraq, when they say it was for humanitarian aid... how Iraq is not boggles my mind, it drives me nuts, we just liberated Iraq, and what are we doing in LIb, well no clue.

well that was a little of my rant, hope it makes sense and you understand my question, so please answer back.

[pRIMrose]

Hi Veritas http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wavey.gif and welcome to http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/gopusa.gif

As for the Dems ~ I don't think anyone has a clue how they think ~ except it's mostly against anything the Republicans want. They are the party of obstructionism, ie the judicial appointees for instance, and the sad thing is, the Republicans have let them get away with it. As for Liberia ~ the Dems know that the UN would support our sending "peace keepers" but they didn't support our going into Iraq ~ ergo the Libs/Dems come down on the side of the UN. http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tqrolleyes.gif

[pcyrdad]

I tried to climb into the Democrat mind... it was really dark and spooky in there, and it smelled like bad cheese...

The Dems only real unifying mindset is power. They want power, and they'll do anything to get it. The issues are as diverse as the various interest groups that make up the Democrat party. Big government may actually be another, more loosely-binding goal, but for reasons that are as diverse as the issues.

First, you have to sort out which type of liberal you're looking at. There are the social liberals (pro-abortion, pro-homosexual, pro-welfare), the pacifist liberals (anti-war, peace at all costs, anti-gun), the environmental liberals, the union liberals, the ethnic liberals, the socialists, the communists, the anarchists... the list goes on and on. Each likely fits into a number of those categories.

Once you have sorted out the categories of liberalism you are dealing with, the mindset becomes much clearer. However, conflict between those categories might emerge. In a real-life "for instance", an environmentalist might also be pro-illegal immigration. How do they handle the conflict of interests when the illegals threaten endangered species in a national forest or wildlife preserve? The answer, very simply, is to ignore any conflict of interests, or, at least, project any guilt or blame on others. It is, therefore, Republicans' fault for wanting to shut down our borders, thus causing these poor, helpless people to have no other recourse than to trample through our precious natural resources. Thus they absolve themselves of the internal conflict.

Absolution is critical to the liberal mind. Guilt, like fruitcake, is more easily given than received, and any measure must be taken to get rid of it without having to eat it. Ethics are situational; the end justifies the means. Liberals live in the gray area between black-and-white truth, and they are loath to consider black and white as anything but darker or lighter shades of gray. And so, the liberal proceeds, guilt-free, and accountability becomes nothing more than a political weapon, with relativism as a political shield.

At this point, liberals realize they have no safety, no security, nothing to protect them should they- dare I say it- have their beliefs challenged and their inconsistencies exposed. Part of the very nature of liberalism is the sense of strength in numbers, the very literal sense of "commune-ism". Entrenched in their own peculiar categories of liberalism, they are united by and swayed by their system of fluctuating ethics.After all, if one liberal is doing what is right in his eyes, why shouldn't another liberal do the same? Heck, even conservatives can do what they want, just as long as it doesn't interfere with the liberals.

Here's where things get sticky. America is founded on conservative beliefs and ideals. Those beliefs and ideals are a part of us, not because we are Americans, but because we are humans, and, as such, hold certain unalienable rights, given to us by our Creator, and among them are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These are not merely components of a nebulous lump of ideology, as the liberals would have us believe, nor are they mutually exclusive. If something isn't an issue of the right to life (which the liberals aggressively ignore) or the right to liberty, liberals believe it falls into catch-all labeled "right to the pursuit of happiness."

What they fail to realize is that, by denying the right ot life, we start losing our liberty, and happiness is thus unattainable, no matter how hard the pursuit. By denying the right to liberty, happiness is unattainable, and life becomes meaningless. By including in the right to pursue happiness things which threaten life or liberty, all three rights are forfeited. And yet, the liberals keep piling on supposed rights, until the very structure of both life and liberty are threatened with destruction.

Now, the conservative, for whom these rights are as sacred as the One who gave them, comes to defend them. The liberal relies on his sense of "commune-ism" to launch a multi-point attack. Conservatives aren't the cold, heartless, unfeeling monsters they are perceived to be. They have feelings, they have flaws, they hate pain and suffering, and they get emotional, too. They even hate being partrayed as cold, heartless, and unfeeling. That's where the liberals attack; not with valid points, or irrefutable logic, but personal destruction. Character assassination. Slanderous accusations. The struggle to defend those sacred rights becomes a struggle to defend the conservative as a person.

The choice must be made: which should be defended first, the conservative, or the conservative beliefs? The answer, and our great conundrum, is that it must be both. the conservative without the beliefs is empty; the beliefs without the conservative to champion them are lost. The liberals are strong, and, by spreading their gospel of moral relativism, they are getting stronger. Conservatives and conservatism are losing ground. We must stand up and defend ourselves, armed with undeniable truth, and able to unravel the Gordian knot of liberal ideology.

(Well, this turned into a longer rant than I had intended, and I'm not sure I answered the initial question, but I spent quite a while on it, so I figured I'd better post it http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laff.gif )

[USMC vet]

Hey pcyrdad:

Nothing like cutting to the chase. *I have observed many of the points you have made, and another comes to mind. That of rationality, or in their case, irrationality. I have seen the dims "project" their own goals onto conservatives with a heaping amount of accusatory bile and hatred. *E.G. stacking the judiciary for one. Stealing elections ( almost in FL, 2nd recall threat on Arnold). Then when they succeed and attempts are made to hold them accountable, well, we all saw their reactions at justifying the immorality of the prevaricator in chief. Observe the impeachment vote: strictly along party lines.

It all ties back in. Consider the media bias, indoctrination at the college level, ACLU and the incessant attack on the Constitution. All of their actions and attitudes are "rationalized" via their loosely defined set of (im)moral standards we all have come to know as humanistic moral relativism.

The libs modus operandi is this: tell a lie long enough and people will accept it as truth.

And if anyone can make an intelligent argument against it, they change the definitions ala U.MI. Discrimination is not ok in undergrad admissions but it is ok for law school admissions???

Heaven help anyone who tries to call them on it. They will end up getting Bork'd. The assignment of a man's name to mean receiving a vicious career ending, slanderous attack, is a sad state of affairs in itself. Witness what they have done to Mr. Estrada, and what they are doing to the Boy Scouts. The lib-dems are like the leopard who can not change his spots. They will blindly follow their socialist leaders, and castigate any who disagree. *And the leaders will never change. To them, they are what they believe. It is their very essence and identity.

Lib-dems wail, whine and cry about how they are being accused of being anti-American, and anti-patriotic, yet they choose to continue doing the very things that ARE anti-American, etc.: relinquish national sovereignty to the UN, go along with socialist regimes who have plans to apply a global tax to American's purchase of firearms. Ostensibly to "feed the hungry", but in fact is a world wide agenda to confiscate firearms. *If the Poles in Warsaw were armed as well as the Iraqis, Hitler would have had an extremely difficult time in taking over. The socialist-communists know this and are relentless in persuing their agenda. Observe Canada, Great Britain, and our own Washington DC to see the immediate increase in crime as a result of gun confiscation. Then you have the Kyoto agreement, and the international criminal courts. Both fine examples of America being demanded to relinquish her independence and sovereighty. Note that they use junk science to justify their agenda, but when real scientists come our with proof refuting their bogus claims, they viciously attack and try to destroy that person's life. *This has happened very recently where some academic researchers were silenced via threat and intimidation.

They transfer their hatred of liberty and America onto the person of George W. Bush, and all others who dare oppose them, and do everything in their power to convince the great unwashed masses as to what to believe. *Refer to the lib modus operandi, aided and abetted by the media and party machine. *

Before they can get the unalienable rights redefined as coming from the benevolent government, they have to eliminate God. Once that is accomplished then by controlling the curriculum in the government schools along with the testing standards, also to be applied to home schoolers, the groundwork will have been laid to indoctrinate the next many generations of children, beginning in pre-K. I am sure you have read where some have espoused the benefit to us and our children by letting them goverment day care workers take control at age 4. *You can also see that the indoctrination is in place in grade schools via the normalization of homosexuality which is part of the NEA's agenda. Compund this with a drumming in of acceptance of gay, lesbian, transvestite, etc. you can begin to see that organizations such as NAMBLA and GLSEN are being enabled by the very bureaucrats running the government. Marginalize the military ( dont ask dont tell), churches ( Catholics via homosexual predators, Presbyterian via homosexual clergy), and any other organizations that uphold morality and virtue as admirable traits ( BSA) and we can see that the Bible is true when it says we struggle not against flesh, but against principalities and evil in high places. For evil to succeed, good men only do nothing.

In addition to controlling our children's minds in "school", they must also turn the children away from the harmful religious beliefs of their parents. This is accomplished partly by removing any control or authority of the parents, relating to abortion. *Florida and California are notorious for their parental notification laws, or rather the lack thereof.

We are not far from Orwell's world of 1984. The New Testament tells us that in those days, good becomes evil and evil becomes good and people become lovers of their own bodies and celebrate their abominations.

I could go on, but this is long enough. I'll close with saying I thank God for my salvation and for the salvation of my precious 12 year old son.

Semper fi