Sowell: The Right To Win

[Terri]

By Thomas Sowell
November 19, 2008

Among the many new "rights" being conjured out of thin air, a new one seems to be a "right" to win.

Americans have long had the right to put their candidates and their ideas to a vote. Now there seems to be a sense that your rights have been trampled on if you don't win.

Hillary Clinton's supporters were not merely disappointed, but outraged, when she lost the Democrats' nomination to Barack Obama. Some took it as a sign that, while racial barriers had come down, the "glass ceiling" holding down women was still in place.

More

[Charie]

Nobody is in favor of anarchy. But some people want everybody else to obey the rules, while they don't have to.

Emphasis mine.

Can't agree with Dr. Sowell on this. As far as I can tell, a lot of these groups call themselves anarchists and seem to thrive on whatever chaos they can cause. Perhaps he's simply referring to those of us in our right minds.

I do believe Sowell has written on that topic before, though. He made the point that hese anarchists are happy to drive on roads and enjoy police protection all at law-abiding taxpayer's expense and they see nothing peculiar about it.

[farmgirl82]

Sowell is right---it happened in Europe 70 yrs ago, the silent majority were intimadated into the only "tolerance" Hitler would allow--the intolerance of the Jews and gypsies and gays. I hope we've all learned the lesson that "tolerance" that leads to a special class with special rights is actually intolerance in disguise

[makamends]

Nobody is in favor of anarchy.

How about the POTUS and governments all over the country not enforcing immigration law? Fooled me.

"tolerance" that leads to a special class with special rights is actually intolerance in disguise

I think that adequately describes the immigration issue.

Sadly, it's not just elections where this right to win concept comes into play. Marxist Liberals are telling children there are no winners and losers. Everybody gets a trophy. Business must not be allowed to fail. No one should be rich. etc.

[papajaxxx]

Tolerance = What we expect of others, but not of ourselves when things don't go our way.

Why should we tolerate something we don't believe in?

It's OK to be intolerant...it's just how you are intolerant.

Acceptable ways to be intolerant:
1. Speak out civilly against what you don't like.
2. Get the laws changed on what you don't like by legal measures.
3. Vote for the candidate who supports what you want.

Unacceptable ways to be intolerant:
1. Threaten others.
2. Damage other's property.
3. Castigate others to cause them hurt or harm.

It appears to me that more conservatives use the acceptable methods and more liberals use the unacceptable methods, but the liberals are quick to call their methods freedom of dissent, and call those whom practice the right methods: Hatemongers.

[schillerbjr]

I concur with PAPAJAXXX post # 5!