Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Rush Nailed It
Throughout his remarkable career, Rush Limbaugh has repeatedly been asked a variation on the question of how he handles the slings and arrows from the liberal community and his answer always intrigued me. He would, he said, remind himself that they were simply projecting their worst traits onto him, i.e., if they accused him of being an angry, bitter person, they were very likely describing themselves. His response had about it a rhetorical symmetry that made it automatically appealing, …an eye for an eye, a psychosis for a psychosis, that sort of thing. But lately I’ve been giving the response a closer look.
Why, for example, in the wake of the horrific Tuscon shootings in 2011, would President Obama implore us to, “pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that — that heals, not in a way that wounds,” and then stand by passively a few months later while Jimmy Hoffa announces a “war on workers,” and exhorts his audience to, “…take these sons of bitches out…” in reference to the Tea Party? The obvious answer, of course, is that Barack Obama would sooner denounce his own pancreas than denounce a union boss. But there is something else at work here.
How else to explain why former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi grew weepy expressing her concern over the non-existent violent implications of Tea Party protests which featured zero arrests, but thanked God above for the Occupy Protests which featured rapes, assaults, vandalism and accompanying arrests? 
She was simply accusing her political opponents of acting like many of her political supporters, the idea being to somehow define those who wish to preserve traditional American values as being outside of those values. Admittedly, it’s a tough sell and a desperate approach, the desperation having been midwifed by a series of failed collectivist experiments that wouldn’t have worked if King Solomon himself had tried them.
So it is that those who believe in such unalienable rights as are written in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution (as opposed to those rights recently located in the left sleeve of John Roberts’ robe) become the object of ostracism, as in the case of a local television station in Raleigh, North Carolina. In the middle a story centering on the fact that rural areas within the state lead the way in concealed weapons permits, WRAL placed a data entry box with the caption, “Find concealed carry permit holders in your area.” Just type in your street, city, county and zip code, and presto, you too can learn who these people are in the same fashion as you might identify, say, sex offenders. The fact that there ought to be a distinction between identifying and tracking down law abiding citizens versus convicts seems never to have occurred to WRAL’s management. But I’m being harsh. Perhaps the thought had occurred after all, but took a distant second place to the priority of shining a spotlight of disdain on people whose belief in self defense reflects that of Thomas Jefferson.
Not to be outdone, the Department of Homeland Security recently released a study in which it described various groups capable of engaging in terrorist activity. Under the subject of “Profiles of Perpetrators of Terrorism-United States,” we find the heading “Extreme Right-Wing,” whose characteristics include,“…groups that believe that one’s personal and/or national ‘way of life’ is under attack, …anti global, suspicious of centralized federal authority, reverent of individual liberty…” George III’s general displeasure with the authors of the Constitution is one thing, but that they would have raised the suspicious ire of today’s federal apparatchiks is telling indeed.
But that is precisely the point! While police and medics were still wading through the carnage of the outrageous massacre in Aurora, Colorado, reporter Brian Ross matched the name of the murderer with that of a Tea Party member and, without verifying its validity, proceeded to assassinate the character of a law abiding citizen on live television because it meshed with a preconceived narrative. What narrative? The narrative that imputes violent tendencies to non-violent people while turning a blind eye to a President’s association with a member of the Weather Underground; that assigns racism to the requirement that voters produce exactly as much identification as is needed to buy a pack of cigarettes but views actual voter intimidation by Black Panther goons as a non-event. It is a narrative that indicts the authors of the Constitution as outside the American mainstream, but enshrines anarchists and the non-productive as the very bedrock of society. It is a narrative advanced by a pastor who invoked The Almighty’s damnation of America, and whose congregant resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Yesterday’s iconoclast has becomes today’s wrecking ball, and the more he succeeds, the more our country fails.
So when the authors of this narrative accuse you of bitterly clinging to your faith and your God-given rights, it’s because they bitterly cling to their faith in omnipotent government. When they accuse you of racism, it’s because they are either unable or unwilling to break free of the chains of a twisted perspective in which everything is seen in a racial context. When they accuse you of being greedy for trying to provide for you and your family, it’s because they are the greedy ones, lusting after the property and liberty of others and the power they imagine will be theirs. When they accuse you of being a threat to society because you insist on having access to the weaponry required to protect yourself and your family, it’s because they view you as a threat to a utopia in which the government prefers to arm drug cartels over law-abiding citizens. When they accuse of you of trying to impose your morals on others, it’s because they desire to impose theirs on you whether through forcing you to subsidize the sex habits of others, or forcing you to purchase whatever product or service suits the egalitarian impulse of the moment.
But as the progressives’ poll numbers decline, it helps to remember that with every malicious slander, with each unfounded accusation, and with every sneer meant to mischaracterize you, these people are instead revealing themselves.
(Cartoon from taxingingtennessee.blogspot.com)
Published in General
It might be time to read Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg. ·3 hours ago
I agree with you there. I was listening to an audiobook on the Third Reich, and I recognized a lot of leftist tactics in Hitler’s thinking. It surprised me how much fascist political methods have found there way into the modern American left.
But it’s important to understand that the phrases “far-right” and “ultra-right,” when not used in a partisan fashion, does not mean movement conservatism. Believing in smaller government and traditional religious (as opposed to ethnic or tribal) value systems does not make one a hate-filled domestic terrorist.
Dave, you have once again nailed it! If Rush is right, you are spot on!
If a man doesn’t believe in truth, he’s not likely to be looking for it either. He’s like a man confirmed in his atheism because he’s stopped looking for God. Such men become either fools or nihilists.
The overheated rhetoric we hear from the left, the media distortions, and the outright lies constitute a tactical gambit that disguises their strategic purpose (increasing state power under their control). Repeating a lie over and over doesn’t make it the truth, but it will in time make a participant believe his own propaganda. Such people eventually become deluded, incoherent, and frantic as their power begins to slip away.
Pathological lying is characteristic of a narcissistic personality. Such people can’t discern true from untrue, but they expect you to believe them with unquestioned obedience. The only thing that matters is that you the listener support and uphold the self-image of the narcissist. The end comes hard for such people. Hopefully by November.
God Save the Republic!
Dave, why don’t you reveal them?
They are called Democrats, a proper noun that does not appear in your post.
Elect no Democrat anywhere, ever.
Eeyore,
Well done.
Thanks.
dt
They are called Democrats, a proper noun that does not appear in your post.
Elect no Democrat anywhere, ever.·0 minutes ago
While most Democrats are progressives or liberals (terms appearing in my post), not all liberals and progressives are Democrats. A few of them have been known to reside in the Republican party as well.
Defeat them all.
Dave, one day you’ll write something that I don’t feel the need to immediately share on facebook, but I get a feeling that day is long in coming. Excellent work, as always.
Maybe one day events won’t compel me to write as if the fate of the country hangs by a thread. But in the meantime, there’s work to be done my friend.
They are called Democrats, a proper noun that does not appear in your post.
Elect no Democrat anywhere, ever.·0 minutes ago
While most Democrats are progressives or liberals (terms appearing in my post), not all liberals and progressives are Democrats. A few of them have been known to reside in the Republican party as well.
Defeat them all. ·2 minutes ago
Look at your examples, and those in the cartoon. All Democrats.
Say the word. Don’t be shy. Democrats have no trouble saying the word Republican when they want to indict you and your beliefs.
When you go into the voting booth the opposition is not the Progressive Party or the Liberal Party or the Leftist Party or the Statist Party.
It’s called the Democrat Party.
Elect no Democrat anywhere, ever.
You certainly squeezed a lot of truth into a short essay. Very well done.
Look at your examples, and those in the cartoon. All Democrats.
Say the word. Don’t be shy. Democrats have no trouble saying the word Republican when they want to indict you and your beliefs.
When you go into the voting booth the opposition is not the Progressive Party or the Liberal Party or the Leftist Party or the Statist Party.
It’s called the Democrat Party.
Elect no Democrat anywhere, ever.·2 minutes ago
If all the examples in the post are, as you say, Democrats, do you think anyone would get the impression that I advocate voting for them? But you’re right. Out of an article running over 700 words, I left that one out. I hope no one is confused as a result. Going to stand in a corner now…
Dave and Rush, what a pair! Spot on, both of you.
Don’t stand in the corner. Get to work writing a book.
Here, I’ll give you the title:
I Can’t Believe I’m Sitting Next to a Democrat!
(H/T to Harry Stein)
Here, I’ll give you the title:
I Can’t Believe I’m Sitting Next to a Democrat!
(H/T to Harry Stein) ·1 minute ago
Admonishment taken.
What’s happened here is that the Democratic Party has sent all the grown-ups packing. We had to flee the rising tide of obvious demagoguery and ill-conceived social engineering.
I’m suspecting now that such was part of the plan. The Democrats realized that they were being held back by responsible adults and they felt they could take power just by appealing to the simple minded, malcontented, and just plain ignorant.
H.L. Menken noted that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. That sentiment, modified for politics, now underlies Leftist political philosophy.
Granted, they’re not all stupid, a few are aware of what’s going on but are so filled with hatred for conservatives that decency and integrity are dispensed with to defeat their insidious foe.
There are ultra-right extremists in this country, though I get the impression they dislike movement conservatism–if for no other reason than movement conservatism’s support for Israel. I’ve always found such groups creepy–for example, black nationalists and white nationalists are not always on bad terms, since they both believe whites and blacks should live in separate countries.
Ultra-right extremism peaked in the 90s, and even with Obama as president they haven’t come back to the extent they did before, partly because state governments and mainstream politicians took up the cause of immigration enforcement, taking that issue out of the hands of would-be domestic terrorists.
It’s important to remember that as much as movement conservatism is denigrated as right-wing, it is very different from the ultra-right–who tend to be ethnocentric, paranoid, hateful, and divided (though the one issue they seem to all share is their hatred of Jews).
These days, when a leftist labels you a bigot, it just means that you find his reasoning faulty and his conclusions wrong. Simply put, to a leftist, a bigot is anyone who can’t be intimidated, either into agreement or into silence. Therefore, Rush is a “bigot.”
Mel, if their arguments prove weak and unfounded, they resort to trying to shut you up. They figure no one can stand the accusation of bigotry and so assume that calling you a bigot will force you to concede the field. It doesn’t work, does it?
It’s no wonder that those who believe that bullying is the scourge of childhood, are the biggest bullies there are. Nearly every talking point is meant to delegitimize conservatives generally, hence stop debate. That’s why we’re racist, rich, homophobic, stupid, dangerous, greedy, usurious, gun-loving, bumpkins, etc. We’re the bad guys, don’tcha know. This confrontation has been building for some time – between those who want to continue the American liberty experiment and those who mistakenly believe that our success can be centrally engineered to approach nirvana, if only we’d just let them. But seeking nirvana is like chasing rainbows – you never quite get there, but waste a lot of time and resources trying. We are seen as the ones snatching the rainbow away, questioning its very existence. How dare we? We dare because the storms are real and we need to survive them. The rainbows, however, are not.
Dave, it also helps to think of Sun-Tzu’s admonition that a general must know both himself and his adversary in order to be undefeatable. The Progressives think they know their enemy, but as they cannot stand to listen to what Conservatives have to say, they end up analyzing only straw men they construct out of their projections. George Lakoff is the high priest of Progressive projection-reflection, so much so that he thinks of Conservatives solely as rhetorical constructs.
Hey, mine was first on the list of the 29 permit holders on my road on the WRAL list! What an honor! [I guess]
To give them a dose of their own medicine, some people are already putting the personal info of WRAL staff online.
This happened some time ago to Michael Bane, but it actually included names and specific addresses. After publishing all the available personal info of the reporter responsible (including her home phone), she had the temerity to call up Michael and give him a “How dare you?!”
“Well, because, honey…”
As a corollary to the libs’ projection problem, Dave, they really don’t like the taste of their own medicine.
This is actually an old spiritual saying: the universe is your mirror, you see in others who you are. What one hates most in others is often things one does not like about oneself or things that one also does.
From a psychological standpoint, it is related to theory of mind. Bluejays that are caching food while watched by another bird will be more likely to return and move the cache if they have stolen food from other bird’s caches. Because they know they can’t be trusted, they assume that other birds can’t be trusted.
Now, compare what the candidates say about each other. Obama says Romney is a greedy pirate who destroys people and takes away jobs. Romney says Obama is a well-intentioned but misguided man. Can’t get a better summary than that. 8-(
Yes, Democrats project their faults, foibles and flaws onto Republicans, especially popular Republicans. They even accuse us of projecting our flaws onto them.
That’s because Democrats want to win. And when you want to win, you use your left and your right; you play “good cop” and “bad cop;” you speak sweet reason and you spew foul invective. Whatever works.
Republicans are regularly surprised at the hate directed at them and at their leaders by Democrats. But hate and ridicule are effective weapons in persuasion. They help to belittle the opposition, make it seem stupid and uncool, and they do not leave room for refutation. To the middle class Republican who comes prepared to debate with the best arguments he can muster, mocking disdain from Democrats can be devastating.
Imagine you on Bill Maher’s hot seat, with his audience cheering him and hooting your every utterance.
Imagine you poll-watching, when a dozen Democrat union guys come in with their “brand new buddies” to vote at your precinct.
Only when Republicans understand that the best persuader is being the “strong horse” and act that way – to make the word “Democrat” a pejorative for instance – will we win.
Ultra-right extremism peaked in the 90s, and even with Obama as president they haven’t come back to the extent they did before, partly because state governments and mainstream politicians took up the cause of immigration enforcement, taking that issue out of the hands of would-be domestic terrorists.
It’s important to remember that as much as movement conservatism is denigrated as right-wing, it is very different from the ultra-right–who tend to be ethnocentric, paranoid, hateful, and divided (though the one issue they seem to all share is their hatred of Jews). ·1 hour ago
It might be time to read Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg.
Another week. Another “most excellent” article.
Keep it up.
I firmly believe that the cause of so much bickering and zingers and satire and backstabbing and … uncivil speech … is because there is no outlet for honest and responsible debate. The partisans snipe at each other because neither side wants an open confrontation. I think they’re afraid of it. They don’t want to put their own convictions to the test of debate. Instead, they’d rather lob bombs from behind the safety of the nearest media outlet.
The Senate was supposed to be the arena where political debate was at its finest. It’s supposed to be the Super Bowl of intellectual competition. Have you seen the well of the Senate on C-Span lately? Nobody’s ever there. Not only is there no Super Bowl … they don’t even bother with the games. It’s just a bunch of politicians proclaiming themselves champions, without going through the bother of actually playing.
And it’s like every juvenile street corner in the world. It’s filled with a lot of talk. They talk brave because they’re scared.
If I were on that list, I’d say to anyone who asked, “That’s right. I could be carrying a gun at any time.”
Some are putting the ideas out there, KC. Not too many Democrats that I know of, unless it’s the idea about Guam tipping over.
Dave,
Check out Jay Nordlinger’s article “A Nasty Little Storm” over at NRO. He explores similar themes, and I liked it so much that I emailed it around. I think you guys are on the same page w/ your posts.
Check out Jay Nordlinger’s article “A Nasty Little Storm” over at NRO. He explores similar themes, and I liked it so much that I emailed it around. I think you guys are on the same page w/ your posts. ·2 hours ago
Excellent column, Ryan. Timely too. Thanks for passing that one along.