Posted on 06/14/2004 10:05:59 PM PDT by clerk
Why the Right Will Lose
Conservative (right) or Liberal (left) are the terms given to the two opposing factions of society today. Neither one is accurate. The difference between the two sides is actually one of emotion.
The left sees nothing as binary, except those who disagree with nothing being binary. There is no right and there is no wrong. There are no absolutes.
The right sees nothing but binary, including those who disagree. There is right and there is wrong and there are choices every step of the way. Absolute choices.
The reason for the difference is one of emotion.
How many Conservative marches on Washington have you witnessed lately? None? How many 'grass roots' passionate position marches? How many protest signs depicting 'up with America'? None?
There will not be any either.
Conservatives like to evaluate things logically: weigh the absolutes and select the side most matching previous logical absolutes.
Liberals like to evalute things emotionally: weigh the myriad visual possibilities and select the side that most matches previously selected visual matches.
The right simply complains.
The right watches and complains while the left takes over.
The right shakes its head and dismisses the emotional outbursts of the lunatic fringe and goes on about its proteced ways.
All the while, the left is watching and planning its next infiltration. It is watching the right shake their heads and witnessing less and less of it as the right becomes used to absurdity and begins to accept it more.
While the left is passionate about its beliefs the right is apprehensive to be passionate about anything, unless it is religion.
Religion has become the right's excuse to be passionate. When in doubt, inject 'What would Jesus do'. Fall back on someone else's interpretation of a point not acquired by the reader. Defend that belief and ignore everything else.
The left dismisses the passionate religionists as zealots and bigots and hypocrites and goes about their merry way of instilling passion for liberal ideals in the minds of the children of those who just shake their heads.
Then there is the Senator from Arizona.
John McCain's name has been published, polled and populated among the people for months now as a possible turn-coat candidate for John Kerry's Presidential aspirations. His response, instead of being what he wrote in his own book (courage and outrage) was to laugh it off and even pretend to enjoy the limelight.
The result was a continued liberal issue that undermined the Senator's constituents in Arizona and could cost him an election. Instead of coming out passionate and outraged, he stayed personally enjoying the press coverage, ignoring the bigger picture. One would have thought a long time politician who spoke emotionally to non-emotional primary voters would speak emotionally to emotional general election voters when it really mattered.
A few conservatives joined together to form the Libertarian Party in hopes of instilling passion in the ranks but all they acquired was a hodge-podge of ultra defensive political nuts who cannot get along with each other, cannot put together a national party and cannot manage to win an election worth winning. Anywhere. They do it by crying for less government intervention when liberals depend on it to provide their base. A losing argument. One does not call for the reduction of another's income in order to free them from the control they have gladly given up over their own lives and expect it to be appreciated.
Liberal 'talking points' are not 'talking points' at all. They are emotional outrages, no matter how untruthful they may be. People grasp on to emotional things.
A mob is created by one person being outraged and reacting emotionally. The next person to pick up on it and do the same thing makes the mob all that easier to grow. The more who take part, the more will join, until one day the world is filled with emotional basket-cases crying for freedom of anything they disagree with and ignoring the laws that give them the right to feel that way.
All the while, the right is shaking its collective head, satisfied to listen to other, 'bigger than life' right talkers on radio pronounce what they wish they could, but dare not: as it might offend someone. So they shake their heads and they lose.
During the recent Iraq War many radio stations across the country, mostly for no other reason than identifying a good promotion, jumped into pro-America rallies. People showed up. People chanted. People yelled. People went home and shook their heads. They have stayed there ever since.
The liberal population is like a car being driven by remote control where all it takes is a loud or obnoxious appeal to emotion to turn the mob toward one goal. Each passenger believes he or she is driving but in reality no one is.
The conservative population is like a car with passengers and no one on the steering wheel. Near misses are thanked for not being fatal. Moving slowly and softly is preferred to rushing forward without a driver at the wheel.
Liberals are moving forward as one. Conservatives are shaking their heads watching them do it.
Culture has changed, as it does every so often. This culture is more and more dependent on visual stimulus. Photos bring outrage while massive numbers of death fall on deaf eyes. That power is being manipulated by liberal visual thinkers to present the worst they can find and representative of those who will not watch them. The mob grows still.
Conservatives, for the most part think with words. They converse to themselves and rationalize troubles away as not personal.
Liberals, for the most part think in pictures. They blend images and make illusions in their heads to evaluate if a current situation matches the known previous image then they become emotional to protect the prior image and band together to form alliances and common goals.
All the while, conservatives have conversed with themselves and shook their heads at the irrational liberal antics.
Liberals grow the ranks through emotional connections. Conservatives shake their heads when wondering how they could just get that one person to see the light. They can't. Unless the light is already shining in a visually thinking person they cannot fathom the potential of one ever being there.
Conservatives like to moan and groan about protection of civil rights not being shown to the majority. But when given the opportunity to be active in the process, they shake their heads. It might mean effort. It might mean taking away from what is so comfortable.
Conservatives like to moan and groan about the marches for abortion 'rights' but shake their heads at any possibility of showing up to make sense out of personal responsibility by making emotional appeals to logic.
You see, conservatives are so much into personal responsibility they do not think they have a responsibility to make others see they are responsible for themselves.
Liberals believe in distributed responsibility, distributed blame: unless the blame can be attributed to a conservative who will just shake his or her head and dismiss the charge as outrageous instead of become outraged and show a little courage.
Liberals do not need courage, they have each other. Conservatives do not show courage as it is nearly impossible to argue with logic when the opponent cannot see it. So they do not even try.
We are faced with a President who does not hate anyone and dare not show emotion as it might be blamed by liberals as being a victory of their lies about lies.
We are faced with a Candidate who hates anything the group he is speaking with hates and loves whatever they love and no matter how many different times the flip-flop is identified if falls on deaf ears as everyone know he believes as they do.
This coming Presidential election is all about the future of this great nation.
It is about whether the nation will survive as a Republic (where the checks and balances of government actually pray to stop kingdoms) or emerge as a Democracy (where the loudest voice, with the largest mob can be crowned forever).
It is about whether the nation will determine its culture or the culture will determine the nation.
It is about whether the nation will be so strong as to threaten or if the nation will be so weak and afraid to threaten, so as to be threatened.
It is about whether the nation will survive as the nation was created.
The right will lose, if the right does not, at least start fighting for the right to shake their heads.
You lost me right after the first line. I don't mind opinions, but can't take you serious when you state there are no differences between the two parties but emotion.
The Democrats today are extreme socialists in the leadership and communists in the unions.
The right/conservatives, want a good life for everyone and for people to be mostly self reliant and working so they can pay taxes.
Having fewer people on welfare in unemployed is a goal for conservatives and shows the most compassion for man kind.
What the right can do a lot better is to be more aggressive for their point of view in public.
I think if there is any weakness in the Republican party, that would be an area I would like to see strengthened.
You underestimate a sleeping giant. The left do what they do only for the show of it. What it will come down to is who is the more inspired... Kerry isn't capable of inspiring a pissant in a sugar factory.
Perhaps I should have started it up with this:
"Reading something takes reading it. Assuming from opening remarks to have garnered the point is simply not all that worth starting to read in the first place. Reading something also requires acquiring the point of the words as a whole. If one is going to read simply those words that push the personal trigger then waiting for the Cliff's Notes version or video tape it worth putting the piece down."
http://pittsburghphlog.typepad.com/pittsburghphlog_journal/files/downer.wmv
11 megs download, but it's worth it.
Registered, liberals are a more fractured group of special interests than the conservatives have ever been.
If anything, liberals at this time are more fractured than a decade ago.
They are far more shrill as well.
Oh I read it, just wasn't all that impressed with the premise. There is no foundation layed for the argument is set.
To begin with, I would not call the difference emotion.
The reason you see liberals marching and not conservatives as often is that conservatives have far less time since they work.
Liberals have no rational argument for anything, so they yell at everything. They are loud and rude in attempts to both get attention and to hide the lack of gray matter behind their arguments.
I think conservatives in general argue more out of common sense and the facts, meanwhile if liberals have emotion, it is because they are simple like children that are behaving badly.
Bless you for having gotten it.
There you go rationalizing the argument. And after your had already nailed it.
Have I seen you on another news site using the same user name to post? I've seen it somewhere.
Hope not. The realization of multiple personalities would be traumatic.
Well http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1153524/posts at least one of them admits it.
I understand and agree with what you said.
The problem I have with the essay is that it is full of Debbie Downers! I will not allow this type of negativity to seep between my ears.
It is clear President Bush hates terrorists and has shown great emotion over the loss of life and the mission that Providence gave him. Is this guy wanting Bush to say he hates Islam? Is he wanting Bush to say he hates gays and lesbians?
I think Bush made a wonderful case for tax cuts, and keeping them permanent.
I just don't believe a President has to "hate" anyone or anything to be an effective tool for "the Right". I believe he has to show resolve.
The rallys that took place across America after 9-11 showed me that Conservative ideology has deep roots in Patriotism. As liberals were trying to convince us that it is indeed possible to "support the military" but not their mission we were winning the debate. Sure, there are liberal elements that seem to be the media darlings, and yes, there are a few that call themselves Republican that simply aren't. It isn't possible to change decades of liberal erosion overnight, but I think we can do it one seat at a time.
I'm Conservative and I am not shaking my head, I'm shaking hands and trying to convince people to saddle up. Essays like this seem to demotivate, and not build a positive approach to the mission.
By the way, I would say the media culture has already made a huge impact on this nation. Drive around your neighborhood and 99.9% of the houses have TV's tuned in listening to the liberal media establishment. Thank God for Fox News, a light in the wilderness.
I agree and also the internet made a big impact.
That was very well thought out... Perhaps you are correct on the matters of the world through a right-wingers' eyes. Most Republicans do not stand up and explain theirselves correctly.
Although your little article was more of a left slant I do agree with "some" of it.
Just remember it has never been your party of bleding-heart libs that has ever done anything with this country...Well, they gave us people to laugh at though. Isn't it funny that two of the biggest libby leaders are the poverty-pimps Sharpton and Jackson... They don't hide behind Christ... They hide in their rich-ass homes when their inner-city communities are falling apart... You know the even funnier thing... their aint no Republicans running that city council.
You will be hearing from me soon world...I promise...I will help the cause.
-cp
http://unionpress.blogspot.com
Ahem...check out his "keywords," and I think the story becomes quite clear.
Let's see:
"clerk"--"Since 2004-06-06"
Check.
Posting "Why the Right will lose" not long after sign up.
Check.
Happy trails, to you, troll...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.