Lately I’ve seen a lot of liberals/democrats/anti-Americans in conservative comments sections. The reason I know it’s them is the tone of their comments, they’re always super nasty, intolerant, very unforgiving, and even outright racist.
For example I saw a post on a very conservative website denouncing a Republican member of Congress for something he said, it turned out to be a misunderstanding and was rectified by talking about it in an interview, but the comment section exploded with so-called conservatives talking about how this man was dead to the party, a turncoat, and much worse. You could see the venom spewed against a man for a simple misunderstanding (a very lefty thing to do) and ultimately see that it was provocateurs trying to turn conservatives against each other.
I generally do not spend time on message sections because of such garbage, but be careful out there, the left is always trying to divide and destroy us with their intolerance and unforgiveness; that’s also how you’ll know it’s a lefty instigating a fight, they are the most vile humans on the planet, yet they’re the party of tolerance!
Just a reminder, the left never stops trying to sow dissent, discord, and division, much like their de facto leader, Lucifer.
Categories
13 replies on “Stay vigilant.”
You raise some good points and I see lots of good points in the comments.
Here’s my two cents. Recently when I heard of a pissing match that MTG and Crenshaw got into. I felt an instant desire to take a side. I then realized I really didn’t know much context on the situation. The stress-o-meter seems like it’s been pegged for so long that it becomes an almost daily exercise to remember to remain calm and let a couple days go by before reacting.
On the flip side, I was recently saying to a friend that it will be a long time before anyone on the left comes within 10 miles of having a good idea. One thing Trump did, probably by accident, is force the right to talk to each other and occasionally argue. A lot of those ill-advised tweets of his got folks on the right thinking, talking and debating with each other. I think that’s a great thing because that’s where new ideas come from.
The left doesn’t seem to want to do anything but instantly cry foul at everything that makes them feel uneasy. You know, things like – thinking.
We’re also heading into what will probably be a super interesting primary season. Hopefully all the rumbling and rankling will produce some great candidates!
The best tool to use against any of them is humor. They simply can’t abide being mocked and their heads explode.
If you’re talking about Senator Cruz, I heard a recording of what he said, and I heard a recording of his excuses on Hannity. My BS-O-Meter went off. I am not going so far as to say “he is dead to me,” but I intend to investigate for myself whether he indeed routinely has referred to “people who attack cops” as “terrorists.” I think it’s BS because he is an extremely gifted litigator who does not misuse words.
Also, the whole situation with Rosanne Boyland and others who were beaten relentlessly by the cops without reprieve–she to death–long past the point that any violence to “stop the riot” might have been arguably justifiable, shows that Senator Cruz is either in ignorance of what happened that day, or lying about it. And since he is on the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittees for both The Constitution (for which he is the Ranking Member) AND the one for “Crime and Terrorism,” he ought to be informed.
I have voted for Senator Cruz with great enthusiasm in every primary and every election since the Tea Party days, and I supported him for the presidential primary in 2016 until the very end. I have often been disappointed in the battles he has chosen not to pursue as a senator, and he is beginning to smell swampy to me. It’s a big change.
Someone who talks about the Bill of Rights all the time ought to be using every bit of his power defending the rights of the people stuck in the DC gulag. REAL terrorists are treated better than they are being treated. He ought to be camped outside the jail quoting Thomas Paine (or rather, his gloss on Voltaire) every day, filming videos and talking about it in every interview. This abuse of the rule of law and of prisoners is so foundational to our republic that it’s hard to imagine in what universe he thinks it’s not important.
And then he turns around and calls them “terrorists”? Really? And I’m supposed to believe it was just a “poor wording choice”?
I think someone has gotten to him. I hope it’s not the CCP.
Either that, or he’s fooled us all for ten years.
It seems that the left’s attempts to divide the conservative base are succeeding. My whole point was to avoid being divided and destroyed by infighting, yet people MUST judge the sinner! If conservative people are going to backbite and tear each other apart the nation is finished.
Yeah, about that …
A friend of mine who’s a doctor and I were talking about Occam’s Razor once. He said that in medical school the relevant principle he was taught was to “look for horses, not zebras”. Which is as good a way to say it as any.
I personally hate the Left with a passion. They are an existential threat to our great Republic, full stop. That the Democrat Party has allowed itself to be dominated by an ideology that ends in a totalitarian State is well past despicable.
That said, I think it’s important not to give them more credit than they deserve. As both Dave Pimental and I pointed out below, this backbiting phenomena isn’t so much a matter of coldly calculated tactics used by the Left as it is human nature. This is why the Left’s “cancel culture” is so effective, it’s not introducing anything new it’s just amplifying a flaw in humanity that already exists.
Accusing a Conservative of being either in league with or duped by the Left is very much akin to the Left calling us all racists and bigots. It’s a hyperbolic stance that does not move that Conservative back into the fold, it alienates them and deepens the divisiveness. While it aids the Left, it does not aid the cause of Conservatism by tempering the attitude a Conservative has adopted.
Which is not to say we should let it go unchallenged. The challenge has to be factual not hyperbolic if it’s to have the desired effect.
Conservatives can be wrong too. Conservatives can succumb to their own human nature too. See what I said to Laura Wallace above.
In what way is it dividing us when we call each other out for our errors? We must judge each other. I am pleased to be called out for my own errors, else how will I ever be able to correct them? But “judge not les ye be judged” does NOT mean “never judge anyone.” It means only judge others in the way you want to be judged, i.e., with fairness and mercy, but also with truth and correction of your errors. In other words, the golden rule.
I’m not talking about voting for Beto next time he runs against Cruz in a general election. But if Cruz starts talking like Liz Cheney then I have a duty and an obligation to call him out on it, and to look for a good primary challenger when the time comes, if he doesn’t correct his error.
(Just as I am looking carefully at Governor Abbott’s primary challengers, and hope that the best one will emerge and beat him, and then go on to slaughter the Democrat in the general election–but if none does, I’ll vote for Abbott again in the general election.)
Looks like today Cruz went a long way towards correcting his error.
As for division among the conservative base, the only division I am aware of is the one between the Never Trumper elite and the grassroots. That’s been there since before Trump: he just clarified it. But the Republican Party (unlike the Democrat) is and was set up from its very beginnings to be run from the ground up, not the top down. If enough people show up, we can regain control of our own party. Participatory democracy the way it was designed to operate. If that’s being divisive, bring it.
You are perfectly right in objecting to Ted Cruz’s choice to use the word “terrorists”.
Ted hurt himself in doing that.
I just watched the Tucker Carlson segment where Ted Cruz apologized for that and admitted it was wrong to do so. Cruz obviously knew he had screwed up and tried to save a little face by offering the excuse that he had gotten into the habit of using that word for anyone who physically attacks law enforcement officers.
Ted Cruz fell into the trap of using hyperbolic speech applied with a broad brush. This is something the Left does to us all the time. He should know better and be called on it. He was. He admitted that it was wrong to do that.
When I look at Ted Cruz’s record historically he’s done a lot more good for the Conservative side than the damage saying the word “terrorist” inflicted.
Cruz is overall solidly in the plus column for our side.
I don’t live in his district so I can’t vote for him but …
Beto O’Rourke tried to take Cruz’s seat in the Senate two years ago. Cruz won but it was the closest election in 40 years of Senate races in Texas. In fact, it was the closest race of any statewide office of any Texas Democrat in the last 40 years.
There is no “more pure” Conservative with the momentum and name recognition in that district who can supplant Ted Cruz.
If you take down Ted Cruz, you get Beto O’Rourke or someone like him.
Does that seem like a desirable outcome to you?
In fact, it could also be said that anyone who tries to get rid of Ted Cruz, to the detriment of the Conservative cause and with the likelihood of someone like Beto O’Rourke supplanting him … Well might it be that such a person has been “gotten to” by the CCP or other negative force.
I don’t think that applies to you. I don’t think it applies to Ted Cruz either.
I think Cruz screwed up and I think he realizes that now. I’m more than willing to forgive him an error considering the consequences. If he had not admitted the error then that would be a different situation entirely.
Well, what a difference 24 hours makes.
My Senator almost made up for his error in his questions to the witnesses at the hearing today. He showed that they were either incompetent or perjuring themselves. It was an excellent cross examination, and it wasn’t prepared on the fly, so he must have been working on it before his unfathomable opening remarks. Which lends credence to the notion that he just misspoke. But I still have research to do on that point.
No, that type of “I’ll never vote for him again even if the Democrat wins” kind of approach doesn’t apply to me. I will vote for Cruz in any general election. I will also pay close attention to his primary challengers, should he have any.
(And BTW don’t get me started on Senator Cornyn, who is one of the dozen or so Republican Uniparty senators who’s giving cover to every one of the Democrat Socialist horrific bills.)
But yeah, he deserved to be called out on that, and he deserves more scrutiny in the future than he did the first few years. He’s been there ten years now. It seems that he’s allowed Washington to change him instead of him changing Washington. He should be the leader of a caucus opposing both the Democrats and McConnell, which would make him the de facto leader. Leaders lead, they don’t just talk. Marjorie Taylor Greene is showing him up badly.
Within a few months of the beginning of President Trump’s first term, I realized that despite Cruz’s more ideological or philosophical alignment with my own worldview, Cruz never would have been able to accomplish one tenth of what Trump accomplished. Trump was definitely the right choice, the only person who could start to turn the ship.
And as time went on, I realized that Trump’s worldview is the one most aligned with reality. I was trained up in that globalist garbage, and even though I never succumbed to Leftism I was a good little Federalist Society member and thought the Bushes were just great, and would have been thrilled to meet Kissinger.
I also thought we should finish cleaning up whatever we were going to clean up in Afghanistan and leave. I expected it to take ten years, not twenty.
And while I’m still much more of a hawk, or at least an anti-isolationist, than the economic nationalists with whom I now identify, I think that a full-throated, unapologetic America First agenda is the only one that is rational in this corrupt world full of people who have been bought by the CCP at every level of academia, corporations, and government. The mercantilism and communism have got to go, and the only way to get there is through the kind of grassroots, bottom-up renewal of the American system by those of us who still know what it means to be an American.
And giving bail to Antifa rioters caught with bombs while keeping people who were walked into the Capitol building by cops unlocking the doors for them in pre-trial, solitary confinement for over a year without bond is not equal justice before the law.
Good for Senator Cruz for grilling those represenatives of the security state that he had before him today.
I watched some of that with Ted Cruz yesterday too. He ripped Merrick Garland a new one.
I pretty much agree with everything you said in your reply above.
It’s vitally important to keep a firm focus on the differences between “correction” and “cancellation”. We really can’t afford to lose people like Ted Cruz just because he committed a political faux pas.
The phenomena of “Friendly Fire” is a very real danger in today’s situation. I’d rather see Ted Cruz learn from his mistakes and improve thereby than see him just bull ahead like he’s not capable of making a mistake. It’s important to be clear when expressing disapproval of someone like Ted, or Donald Trump.
Because for too many people today, disapproval of an aspect or an action is a call to cancel the person entirely. The idea of someone meeting some sort of Pristine Conservative Purity Test every time without fail is all too real and very destructive to our own side. Right off hand I can’t think of a single well known Conservative personality whom I have not seen someone calling themselves a Conservative call for throwing under the bus.
The reverse is also true, too many people calling themselves Conservatives are way, way too willing to throw other Conservatives under that same bus if the other guy disagrees or God forbid doesn’t fit the mold they have created for what a Conservative should be. A fine example of that sort of thing is the knee jerk reaction to any constructive criticism to their idols.
Just as it’s not a good idea to try to take down anyone who doesn’t pass the Pristine Conservative Purity Test, it’s an equally bad and dangerous idea to create idols or to idolize anyone. Two very negative things happen when you do the latter —
That person suffers no consequences for grievous errors so they have no incentive to correct them. In fact if not called on them may very well rationalize that there was no error at all. Which is politically damaging to them and those that idolize them.
A blind spot is created that the adversary can and very much will exploit.
Trump was the man for the job and he did a great job. If he’s nominated I’ll vote for him again but …
He’s not a Statesman of the caliber Ronald Reagan was either. Ronnie is the gold standard I’m afraid, and Trump at his very best was a high grade of silver. If Trump had emulated Ronnie’s statesmanship integrated with his own policies I don’t think the Left could have beaten him even with all the cheating they pulled off. That would have put us on a path to clean up the mess this nation has become and successive elections would have been much easier for Conservatives to win. That one fault may very well have thwarted the very thing that Trump and the rest of us who support him was trying to accomplish. We were on the path to accomplishing that and now we’re not. That’s a problem.
While statement like that may get me in hot water with the adorational acolytes of Trump Worshippers, and it may all be water under the bridge and a moot point now …
We all need to learn from our mistakes. Even Donald J. Trump can profit from doing that.
Agreed, except for “statesmanship.” I don’t care very much about that since I’ve come to understand that the type of economic nationalism that Trump preached and practiced is the only rational way to combat the globalist agenda, and most importantly, that it’s the latter which is the existential threat to Western Civilization.
That was the part that was very hard for me to accept. That the globalist agenda isn’t just a slightly-misguided but ignorable bunch of wackos meeting in Davos every year, but that everything about it is antithetical to our values, our way of life, and our security. And furthermore, it is NOT inevitable (which is what the elites believe, because that’s what they were taught at university).
Trump is one of the only people to see this clearly and say it out loud and pursue an agenda in opposition to it. Reagan, I would argue, as great as he was, still acceded to the globalist agenda. His fault perhaps was in believing that the U.S. would maintain its hegemony and be the default global model and economic driver. He didn’t forsee that the elites of the world, including within our own country, would seek to eradicate the U.S. hegemony in favor of another country, particularly China.
Trump, on the other hand, reversed the trajectory, used tariffs in a good way (another thing I was taught was ipso facto bad/impossible), achieved an incredible peace deal in the Middle East, reduced the threat of nuclear weapons from both Iran and North Korea, and most importantly, rejected the UN’s attempted takeovers of our sovereignty through organizations like the WTO, the climate change alarmists, etc.
But I started out here because I wanted to make a point that Trump does indeed have major faults. I think we may disagree about where they are.
Trump has two Very Big personality flaws. He doesn’t like to admit he was wrong, much less that he was duped or manipulated, and he always chases the shiny things (new, technological, and expensive).
Both of these flaws were exploited viciously by the bureaucracy’s response to the CCP virus. They checkmated him on the mRNA shots, first by telling him it couldn’t be done, then by selling it to him as shiny new tech that no one else would be able to bring to the world quickly enough to save the world. They got him to sign off on all of the EUAs that by their lawful terms required that no therapeutics were available. Even with therapeutics, they manipulated him to use the shiny new ones like Remdesivir which, it turns out, cause more harm (and death) than good. Even the shiny new ventilators we built in TrumpTime for the world turned out to be the wrong treatment for this virus, but the bureaucracy created significant monetary incentives for hospitals to put patients on ventilators, which caused a lot of unnecessary deaths.
I could go on and on, but the point is that Trump doesn’t like to admit that he was lied to and manipulated because he prides himself on his ability to read people. That’s his thing. That’s how he makes “great deals.” That’s how he ran his empire, made great TV shows, etc., etc. Yet it turns out that half of his hand-picked key players in his administration were actively undermining him and his agenda at every opportunity–and they did it by lying to him. And he fell for it.
Just a few weeks ago he was still touting the “great” vaccines and claiming that “no one” had died from them.
He has got to own up to this publicly and get past it, and quickly, or during the next election cycle the Democrats are going to reverse course and paint him as Mengele.
The dictionary I have installed on my computer (WordWeb Pro) defines “Statesmanship” as —
What you said Trump got wrong is entirely a matter of wisdom in the management of public affairs. I agree with you entirely and I think we’re talking about the same thing looked at from two different angles. That doesn’t mean either angle is wrong, the two angles compliment not negate each other.
Both our views are valid, the points we both make are correct observations.
That said, Ronald Reagan, like Trump, was a patriot. It’s not surprising that he would make the mistake (and as it turns out it was a mistake) of thinking that Americans who have benefitted the most from the American system would support America, first.
That they would not do that has as you pointed out, become evident.
That Donald J. Trump was aware of that fact is also evident. He is to be highly commended for reversing that trajectory, or at least making serious, significant efforts in that direction.
Neither Reagan nor Trump had/have crystal balls and predicting the future is dicey at best. There are too many variables and too many significant unknowns for that to work. We see this in play in a very big way with Global Climate alarmists’ arguments. Which are actually the politicization of science not real science anyway. But it’s a good example even so.
Ronald Reagan was not perfect either and expecting a person, any person alive and walking the Earth in a corporeal sense, to be perfect is a mistake in and of itself.
That said, Ronnie was a lot better at demonstrating wisdom in the management of public affairs than Donald Trump. Trump’s policies were great in the arena you cite. Not so wise in other areas and it’s a sad fact that it’s those other areas that can turn around and bite you in the gluteus.
The difference here is that Ronald Reagan served two consecutive terms and the policies of a first term have to be amplified and executed in the second term to have maximum effect.
Trump might run for re-election. He might even win (if he does, I hope he does) and be able to right the ship of state again. He would be greatly aided in that by the absolute travesty of the Joe Biden administration.
If Trump does run and win, I hope someone can get through to him with a “lessons learned” point of view and he fixes what he did wrong last time.
Because Donald J. Trump had put us on a path were that positive effect was not only manifest in his policies but there was a very good chance that the Conservative ideals he exemplified (and not all of them were Conservative ideals) would be carried over to several future election cycles.
Of course that’s what scared the crap out of the Democrats too. The only way to overcome their strident, persistent lies and coup attempts is the application of good Statesmanship.
Actually, this behavior transcends politics. It is nothing to do with left, right, up, down, sideways, etc. It is a very human thing to do. People have been targeting the “others” outside the “tribe” for all of human history. Unfortunately, gossip and pettiness are traits that have been a part of our psyche since the fall of Adam and Eve. Your little rant here is just another example of this same trait, and I know I am too often guilty of the same.
I see the very thing that Troy is talking about all the time and it seriously chaps my … um, hide.
However, you are correct that the phenomena of back biting cancel culture is not solely confined to the Left. More’s the pity.
It is indeed a function of the human psyche, we have plenty of nasty, closed minded, intolerant-of-the-thoughts of other people types on our own side working against our own interests.
I’ve seen it here on this very site myself and I confess that I have zero patience with people who engage in what has previously been pointed out as a “circular firing squad”. Which is a very apt term.
Here we are, trying to save the Republic from an existential threat posed by the Left and … If you don’t think like some people they are more than willing to toss you under the bus.
The type I’m talking about is a fairly simple minded, black & white (not in a racial sense, in an ideological sense), zero shades of gray, my-way-or-the-highway mentality. We’ve got plenty of those on the Right too.
They’re doing more to aid the enemies of the Republic than they are to aid its preservation and they don’t even know they’re doing that.
They do not seem to stop to think what will replace a well known public figure if just because he or she does not mesh 100% with their thinking they manage to cancel that person. Such people do not seem able to take into account the larger picture of the greater threat.
If Ted Cruz says something stupid then it was a stupid thing to say and he needs to be made aware that we disapprove of what he said. He doesn’t need to be dragged into the street, tarred and feathered then drawn and quartered. Because he’s still a powerful ally to the Right and the last thing we need is to see him voted out of office and replaced with Beto O’Rourke.
If Andrew Klavan says that while the election may have been stolen and probably was, unless you can prove that in court you’re not going to upend the election itself and put Donald Trump back in office … He’s right. He’s speaking the truth. Whether anyone likes it or not. He’s still out there espousing Conservative principles and values, mostly.
Etc. Those are just a couple examples I’ve seen that pop to mind. I could think of and list dozens.
If you drew a Venn Diagram of any public figure on the right who has drawn that kind of ire you’d see that they’re 90% a champion of Conservatism and maybe 10% things someone might not agree with. 90% is good enough, after we save the Republic we can work on the leftover 10% that we might not agree with. If you take them down, you take them down 100% and ignore that simple fact.
That’s kind of thinking is what makes the Conservative Cancel Culture simple minded, but that does not mark them as agents provocateur of the Left. Nor does it make those who voice opinions contrary to the greater good Leftist infiltrators. It just marks them as a problem I wish we on the Conservative side could overcome.
All of that said, there are people I wish would join the other side and “help them out” like they’re doing for us. I have zero tolerance for Right Wing Conspiracy Nuts and I think they make us all look like a bowl of Fruit Loops. The Leftist media will ignore the 99.9% of us who make reasoned, intelligent, factual arguments and point out the Right Winger who thinks the Pentagon was hit on 9/11 by an American missile from and American submarine despite clear evidence that could not possibly have happened. It was an airliner, there are witnesses and video of an airliner.
That kind of person is always wrongly cited as exemplary of the Right and that’s why they’re so damaging. We can’t get anywhere with the majority of the nation that could be swayed by reasoning and logic if we are all successfully painted as a bunch of kooks. That’s the point, no one listens to kooky nutjobs and is embarrassed if they even try. This isn’t trivial, the Leftist media has done this to us with their “racist white nationalist” hogwash and they most certainly use Right Wing Conspiracy Nuts to reinforce the idea that all Conservatives are vile.
This resources our adversaries and detracts from our message in a very negative way so …
In that regard, I’m as guilty as anyone of wishing that some people nominally on our side would just STFU and let us get on with preserving our great Republic.
Here the old saying that “If you’re not part of the solution you’re part of the problem” holds true. If you are not helping us solve the problem and are hindering us in creating a solution by making us look like a bunch of idiots you’re not helping anything at all.
I’m more than willing to “cancel” that kind of person but I don’t generally think they’re just Leftist agitators. So I’m guilty too, but in a matter of degree and with the larger picture in view.
(Note: When I say “you” I’m speaking generically and not directly to you, Dave. You yourself are not the kind of person I’m using the word “you” to make my point. There are things we disagree on and that’s fine, keep up the good fight. Same goes for Troy.)