Topic: Old & Busted: Hate Speech...The New Hotness: We Hope All Your Kids Die..Horribly

[Weisshaupt]

See, I think that when those ruling agitators gain real power - as they have now - the free-sh*t army is just as dangerous - just as prone to the things Pan warns of. It is the collective Left that poses a threat, in all its facets.

Every Army  still needs to eat.  I don't think the Fed will be able to provide, expect by offering the benefit of pillage. Even then, most of the Free-Shyt army (outside of the ghetto)  desperately needs to believe they are "good people"  - they are all feelings and ego. They will vote to use the government as a weapon, because it puts a degree of separation between them and the act of violence.  Put the weapon in their hands, and  most of that army will sit down and do nothing.  Yes, that still leaves a sizable portiuon of the Army to deal with, but most of these middle and upper class feel good, dinner party leftists, will just shut down and "stop caring about politics"   They will be in full denial mode. They will hear no evil, see no evil, and probably do no evil, other than ignoring the evil around them. I don't see the Fed having the resources to feed them, so their hunger may force them into the ranks, but I don't think intellectually or emotionally  will they be able to do the job. They will shirk as much as possible.

the 20-30% that find us truly evil... they may want to do the job, but they are so damn stupid I doubt they can do it right, and will instead concentrating on raping and robbing  rather than in actually engaging resistance.




   

[Weisshaupt]

Jesus Christ Almighty already, Weisshaupt! 

What she said? 

The Left are not self-doubters, they're not passive by any means, and they're not fearful.  They believe they are the smartest people in the room and they're determined to prevail and impose their vision of good on us all. 

Good. grief.

Right up until they have to take the gun into their own hands to do it.  IDP is right, they only work via the collective -  Society MUST BE  responsible for what they do.
Yes there are leftists who will gladly take up arms against us for the power and ego rush.. but there are many who would not. Who have been so conditioned that war is not the answer, that guns are evil,  and who so firmly believe they are the light and the good in the world, that they can't do it personally. But the work of the collective must ultimately be done by individuals. Wishing doesn't make it so.  Most of the left is in denial.  They can't and won't accept that " world they need to create to ensure their fair share is a no-go in any group larger than a few hundred at the most. " They want, desperately, to believe they live in a voluntary culture, where the majority are willingly part of their tribe, and its just a few (evil) malcontents who need to be forced.  Its a myth they have to believe.
They deny any large group takes advantage. They think everyone works ( or wants to work) as hard as the next guy. 
They must believe are the majority. That they are good and that everyone accepts and wants their way of living.

 I have said it before, they can't even conceive that we are willing to die rather than be a part of their crap.  My mother recently sent me another email saying she "didn't understand" how I could let this affect "family"  - as if she had nothing to do with the new gun laws or Obamacare, or any other of the daily attacks on my faith, freedom and beliefs. She supports both Obamacare and the Gun laws. She voted for sending a person with a gun  into my home to enforce these edicts, cheered as her bullies got that law passed, and "doesn't see" why this should affect our relationship. Its the collective doing it, not "her".  They desperately need to pretend it isn't them. They feel the collective decision justifies the violence. No raindrop feels responsible for the flood.  "Gemeinnutz geht vor eigennutz" justifies everything. How could I reject the comfort of belonging to the collective? The Security of the Herd?  They don't, at a very fundamental level, understand why we reject their noble "kindness" - but suggest to them that if they feel so strongly they should come into your house and do it themselves, and they will recoil from the idea. Its never their personal responsibility, and can't be unless they have the Badge- the saction of the collective that makes them the enforcer. And when you point out the government has as much right to come into your house and tell you to buy health care, as they do, lacking the consent or power to pass such an edict, that concept too is beyond them. There is no room in their minds for personal responsibility- the collective must rule all. It can't be limited. Everything they do is done to protect thier fantasy world and fantasy idea of themselves.

A Lefty will of course take up a gun to steal food for themselves,  to rape and to pillage to boost their own egos, but they have no loyalty to the collective. Its a tool to make them feel good. Its a method of removing themselves from the base violence of their actions.  They won't die for the collective. They will only die for their own egos. That is why Hitler called them a "master race" - he fed the thug's egos,  telling them they were good because they were going to bring about Utopia.  None of them cared about Utopia. They cared they were "good"  These entitled bankrupt thugs  won't, by and large, put their lives on the line to force this down your throat, because there is nothing that is greater to them than their own lives.  If it isn't helping them personally, they won't do it. Be it charity. Or violence.

[whimsicalmamapig]

I believe that those on the left side of the argument that are the "leaders" such as Pelosi, reid, Sharpton et al are not  members of the passive group I delineated but are, in fact, opportunistic aggressive types who see an opportunity to gain power by utilizing the ideology and "group speech" of the lefties in order to utilize their group strength. they only lack the cultural sense of group honor and shame which is typical of the left where the ends always justify the means.

I will never believe that Pelosi, Obama, feinstien  etc actually believe the passive crap they speak. did you ever see feinstien spreading her wealth? but the majority of the passive left desperately want leaders who will give them that utopian world they want but do not have the stones to get for themselves and easily accept these types of leaders without much inspection as they prove the means to an end that is acceptable to them.

as for displays of "force" such as sit-in demonstrations, vandalism and even acts of violence, they are done in individualistic personal acts that do not reflect the "warrior ethos" of the aggressive types and do not represent group power and altruistic sacrifice for the common good but are asymmetrical acts done in spontaneous emotional outbreaks.

It's not that the left can't display anger, frustration and violence, it is the manner in which they do this and the lack of a value system created to curtail and proscribe its use. You don't usually see the aggressive types engaging in many mass demonstrations run amuck but that is usually the end result of leftist demonstrations where there is chaos and atrocities with regularity because their tendency to violence is individual and petulant.

[Libertas]

The Left are not self-doubters, they're not passive by any means, and they're not fearful.  They believe they are the smartest people in the room and they're determined to prevail and impose their vision of good on us all. 

Taken individually, I think that Mama's assessment may be an accurate generalization. Leftists derive the attributes you describe only when they have the power of the collective. In numbers and once in power, their collective inner child becomes a bully, then, mass graves.

I think a distinction can be made between the ruling agitators who are at/near the mass grave stage and the rank and file Free Shyt Army can't-see-past-the-end-of-their-nose mostly brain-dead streetwalking emoting libiot in the proto-bully stage.

See, I think that when those ruling agitators gain real power - as they have now - the free-sh*t army is just as dangerous - just as prone to the things Pan warns of. It is the collective Left that poses a threat, in all its facets.

I agree, IMO it is not a far walk for a libiot to make from common leftbot to full-blown agitator.  But the desire to commit more mischief increases exponentially to the amount of power an agitator is allowed to exercise...we've all seen the error in giving leftists ANY power, from local neighborhood busybody to POTUS...giving a lefty ANY power is a mistake and should be avoided at all costs...and letting them take more than they are entitled to exercise (a common Pubbie sin) is unforgivable.

[whimsicalmamapig]

I have become a fan of "the five" and have watched the demeanor of bob Bechtel evolve over this past year. He was a confident espouser of liberal babel at the beginning full of the hubris he was channeling from his leader. as the year continued and his leader has become the powerless laughing stock of much of the real world Bechtel has devolved into a mean spirited, spoiled brat, unable to defend his leader and relegated to spouting old leftist diatribes and pouting a lot.

this is what is happening to the left, their leaders have ventured out past what the tribe can support and they are unwilling or unable to follow in a direction that would require them to stand up and defend their ideology. much like the OWS crowd that faded when the weather and the going got tough.

We should learn from this and realize that the left is really only as strong as their leadership can inspire them to be. what they really want is to sit passively and spread the wealth in a "peace at any cost" environment as long as they get their next meal. Obama could not inspire them to rally behind him to bomb Syria for gassing it's people, they wanted to stay safe at home. there was no commitment to their values, just lip service. their  passions are skin deep and for demonstration purposes only, they are not willing to sacrifice for the cause. (there have been rare exceptions to this but they are anomalies )

like Obama care, the right should utilize this inherent weakness and enable the bills actualization and force the left to partake of it without any exemptions and see just how deep their commitment is to equal treatment under the law. you will see obamacare disappear in swift time.

[Glock32]

I think one group has been passed over in this discussion of the different types of people that fall under the Left's umbrella, and that's the apolitical thug/criminal element. What a lot of you have said about the more effete intellectual Left is true, but that's also why actual Leftist revolutions have made use of basically mercenary armies. Empty the prisons and dangle an offer of plunder and rape without consequence, just do your plundering and raping against the targets we give you.

It's also why Leftist revolutions, upon consolidating power, as their first order of business dispatch a substantial portion of their own "true believers". Some of them are such true believers that it's said many people in the Soviet gulags openly wept when they heard that Stalin had died, totally oblivious to the fact that it was Stalin who put them there.  Yuri Bezmenov gave a fascinating interview in the early 80s where he talked about the process of destabilization, demoralization, takeover, and consolidation and how the ruthless element of the Left invariably must eliminate the less-ruthless element of the Left.

So don't take any sort of consolation from the fact that your rank and file liberal probably lacks the courage of his convictions, because there are elements in society who will happily do the dirty work without any consideration of ideology but because they simply enjoy it for its own sake.

[whimsicalmamapig]

glock, are you  inferring that harry reid is a mercenary thug?

 I agree with your thesis, but these thugs only stay "loyal" as long as they are "paid" and our government is running out of cash. even the unions are deserting them (ie obamacare).

we will see how loyal Lois Lerner remains when she needs to pay for her own legal defense, she will turn states witness to save her own bank account.

to paraphrase Margaret thatcher, the left is finally running out of everyone else's money. I am just curious as to how the welfare masses will react when there is nothing for them to gain from the left, will they come out at riot when there is no bama phone to recompense them?

[Libertas]

G makes a good point, shock troops can come from many quarters...what history shows is retaining control over those quarters (up to and including killing them off once no longer necessary) can be dicey.  Just like playing a massive shell game with the economy the left foolishly thinks they can control all the forces they unleash...they are mistaken and much blood will prove it once again.  When the crap really hits the fan all bets are off.

[Glock32]

Well, I am talking about the Left's behavior outside of any established political process, i.e. when they are openly executing a coup. In the Bolshevik period in Russia, 1917-1922, they used common criminals, foreign brigands (most notoriously the Chinese) to do a lot of their dirty work. And even the outwardly bookish, intellectual Lefties can surprise you. I believe they are tapping into demonic influences when they whip up these orgies of murder and torture. Lenin said it is far better that 10,000 innocents die than for a single "class enemy" to survive.

[whimsicalmamapig]

you are absolutely correct about the lefts use of thugs etc, but the thugs aren't usually the ones voting. It is the lame-a$$ intellectuals and weeping tree-huggers who religiously make it to the polls. these are the ones who baked cookies for Dennis Kucinich. I am just glad to see that the unions are realizing that the left has very little left to offer them in exchange for their "support"

my other big concern is the entrenched lefties in our bureaucracy and educational system. they can do as much damage by manipulating our government agencies and the minds of our children as any group of thugs. it doesn't take much fortitude to mis-educate children from the comfort of a unionized well-paying job. and let's not even go into what the irs is capable of. (speaking of hired thugs did you watch the "security guard"  man-handle a parent at a school board meeting about common core. a veritable example of your thug for hire thesis.)

[Weisshaupt]

I agree, IMO it is not a far walk for a libiot to make from common leftbot to full-blown agitator.

I think its pretty obvious that we are dealing with different populations and kinds of leftists .. we have discussed this before using several different analogies: The Sheepdog, Wolves and Sheep, Dawkin's evolutinary model of Grudgers, Cheaters and Suckers, and Evan Sayet's explanation via Howard Zinn:

“Objectivity is impossible, and it is also undesirable. That is, if it were possible it would be undesirable.”-Howard Zinn

The First order liberal- the sheep, or the sucker, is of the first class, that simply believes objectivity to be impossible.  They therefore do not think about anything. They feel. They are therefore easily led, swayed and manipulated by he second order Lefty - the Cheater, the wolf -- who knows objectivity is possible, that there is an objective truth, but cynically rejects it in favor of power - to advance a personal goal ( or vendetta)  Zinn is obviously himself a second order lefty- totally aware that objectivity is possible but rejecting it because

"objectivity is not desirable because if we want to have an effect on the world, we need to emphasize those things which will make students more active citizens and more moral people."

Translation: Its okay to lie to people (suckers, sheep) if doing so gets them to behave in the way you want them to behave. All very narcissistic and  nihilist - the ends justify the means no matter what, because you think your greater goals trump the facts, as well as other individuals right to know the truth and decide for themselves. 

Not all leftists are this way.  The Cheaters, Grudgers, self appointed Nietzschean  Übermensch are all perfectly willing to kill us if they need to, and willing to try to manipulate the Sheep, cheater, useful idiot, non-thinking moron into doing so as well,  but the sheep MUST FEEL that are doing good when they do it.  They have to feel justified in shoving you into the oven.  I am not saying it can't be done, but the sheep are by nature pacifist herd animals. They are far happier not being involved, and they will let the Wolves do their dirty work if at all possible.  If they do it, it has to benefit THEM in an obvious, easy to understand way ( They eat today if they do it, and don't if they refuse)

One could argue the Wolves come in two classes : the successful,  like Harry Ried and Pelosi, and the unsuccessful - who end up becoming thuggish security guards at school board meetings.  But they are thieves all and loyalty is dependant upon what they can get out of it. None of them are in it "for the cause" that the Sheep think they are supporting. And soon as the pay stops, so do they.

[IronDioPriest]

you are absolutely correct about the lefts use of thugs etc, but the thugs aren't usually the ones voting. It is the lame-a$$ intellectuals and weeping tree-huggers who religiously make it to the polls.

That may have been true at one time, but it seems to me that this has changed since Obama. He has tapped into the free-sh*t army, and with the aid of true-believer minions, he has mobilized them.

That has been the conservative's mistake. We have always assumed we were the "silent majority". Obama has awakened the true silent majority - losers who never bothered to vote - and the Leftists are in the process of growing that majority faster than any of us dared think possible.

[Glock32]

And consider that he is also mobilizing people who do not exist. Dead people, phantom people invented out of thin air, or electoral doppelgangers (i.e. people voting multiple times).

They have no scruples. Their only animating motive is to impose their will, and they will do so by whatever means they can. That "our side" is nominally represented by people who either cannot or will not understand this simple fact is in a way more dangerous than the Left itself. We're trying to yell "Fire!" and they're busy soothing the masses saying "Oh don't be silly, that's not smoke, it's just condensation from the air conditioner", "That smell is nothing, somebody just burned a piece of toast".

What is it they say about domesticated horses and other barn animals? They'll just stay in a burning barn and burn to death because they don't know "how" to survive anymore?

The GOP is no longer just an ineffective vehicle, it is actively opposing efforts to restore a constitutional, representative republic, because its leadership has cynically calculated that it will benefit more from a power sharing arrangement with the Democrats (in the decidedly junior role).

[whimsicalmamapig]

well, guys you are a real downer for the day, but no matter, I think it is time to find our Epimonandas and march our Thebans straight into Sparta.

Only straightforward assault on the system of the left will dismantle them, they are as wily as the Iranians "talking" to Obama and as deceitful as Assad in a tv interview.

My contention still holds true, there are 2 types of humans, aggressive proactive types who get things done and passive "sheep who follow"

you can find aggressive types passing as leftists, they are aggressive and they do get things done, but you find very few passive "sheep who follow" hiding out amid the right. It is very difficult for sheep to profess a "warrior code" demeanor.

[LadyVirginia]

The selfish group is always going to be bigger.  People didn't become less self-interested with Reagan.  he didn't usher in a new era of conservatism that people forgot over the next several elections.  he tapped into that self-interest by appealing to it via conservative ideas.  You can have more and be more if you follow these ideas.  Those people were never true believers in conservative thought.  Reagan just got them to think they'd get what they want if they followed him.  I think a lot of them thought that his way was the way to go because it meant other people would get less free stuff and more for themselves.

No raindrop feels responsible for the flood

I like that.  I've said the same about people who get abortions or support social security. It's never them.

[whimsicalmamapig]

well then who are the selfish? are they the spread-the-wealth sheep who want an equal distribution of everyone's hard work regardless of the amount of effort contributed? or is it the "Steve Jobs" type who amasses a personal fortune by virtue of his hard work?

selfishness in itself is one of our prime human motivators, I am just contesting that there are 2 different types of human action to achieve this, either the aggressive types who take command and make the wealth or the sheep who huddle in groups and want to shame you into not sharing on an equal basis regardless of you contribution. ( and when the group becomes too large for shame to work, they turn to using the hired force of amoral aggressive types to impose their will because they do not have the stones to do much for themselves but covet.

[LadyVirginia]

well then who are the selfish? are they the spread-the-wealth sheep who want an equal distribution of everyone's hard work regardless of the amount of effort contributed? or is it the "Steve Jobs" type who amasses a personal fortune by virtue of his hard work?

That's an outside looking in, liberal/socialist view of selfishness.  If someone has amassed a lot it must be because they're selfish.
Jobs may or may not have been selfish.  I don't know.

I meant selfish in terms of a human, personal trait where one thinks of his gain first before another's whatever form that takes--aggressive or not.

[whimsicalmamapig]

sorry, when I think of selfish I think of the stingy types who hold dearly to their stuff and won't share, give the smallest amount when the hat is passed and will take an extra cookie when the plate is passed.  in other words, ones who view their happiness and welfare in light of what they possess. I use Steve Jobs, maybe as an inappropriate example of the businessperson who will do anything for the buck, perhaps Jobs is not the best example, maybe Ken Lay would have been better.

that archetype can be found on the left and the right, I think I am more about the makers than the takers being similar to the agressives and the passives, those will take control of their destiny and those who want to just lay back and let destiny wash over them as long as their is a verifiable flow of food and shelter.

[Weisshaupt]

sorry, when I think of selfish I think of the stingy types who hold dearly to their stuff and won't share, give the smallest amount when the hat is passed and will take an extra cookie when the plate is passed.  in other words, ones who view their happiness and welfare in light of what they possess. I use Steve Jobs, maybe as an inappropriate example of the businessperson who will do anything for the buck, perhaps Jobs is not the best example, maybe Ken Lay would have been better.

that archetype can be found on the left and the right, I think I am more about the makers than the takers being similar to the agressives and the passives, those will take control of their destiny and those who want to just lay back and let destiny wash over them as long as their is a verifiable flow of food and shelter.

There is taking control of your destiny within a moral framework and without one. You can be as greedy and unsharing as you want as far as I am concerned as long as you aren't holding  a gun to my head and telling me I must do business with you. You can do anything for the buck, but using force to take the buck from me without my consent. If you control your own  destiny by attempting to control by force, threat or other coercion, the destiny of others, you are a moral  degenerate. 

[whimsicalmamapig]

so you believe that the IRS, for example, by use of force to take your money, is degenerate?