Ever notice that when bloggers on the Left dislike an idea that makes sense, they resort to childish namecalling, without even addressing the issue?
Here are two examples, both from yesterday, attacking Chuck Norris' take on secession on the Glenn Beck program:
Daily Kos: “Chuck Norris and Glenn Beck Want to Cut-and-Run”
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/3/9/22263/22336/239/706594
drinking liberally in new milford: “Will the GOP upChuck on Norris support?” – also includes attacks on Sarah Palin:
http://drinkliberal.blogspot.com/2009/03/will-secessionist-sarah-upchuck-on.html
The most unfortunate thing is, there are grownups who take them seriously.
8 comments:
arguably because we believe in precedent and the constitution
So do we.
State sovereignty is not promoting secession! It is promoting true democracy by letting power reside more closely to the people. It is affirming the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights as they were written.
So I repeat my question...
we were never meant to be true democracy so you are arguing against the intent, nor were we ever to have a real say
the left doesn't have a foundation in traditions, values, and morals, and they hate everything and anything not in line w/ their "collectivist" agenda. they hate those of us who celebrate individual freedom and believe in being the best you can be and reaping the rewards of our own hard work, property rights, etc. - merely because we don't share their marxist agenda. state sovereignty is a threat to their nirvana under their marxist leader who thinks he's Lincoln.
How can anyone take Glen Beck or Chuck Norris seriously? "We surround them" ??? Perhaps they surround their own egos.
The childish kneejerk reactionary incitement to violence from these two whack jobs is something to be mocked.
Harold Thomas: Norris aims to be president of Texas. That can only be achieved through secession.
You are asking the wrong questions. And you are asking them of the wrong people.
ConnecticutMan1:
Supporters of the State Sovereignty Resolutions do not advocate either violence or secession; and I agree that reasonable people can have issues with both Glenn Beck and Chuck Norris.
My question has more to do with the "infantile" way the Left attacks its opponents, rather than dealing with the issues on their merits (or lack thereof).
Attacking them? I am mocking them. But I am attacking those who advocate for secession just because the rest of America has rejected their deregulated free market run amok, especially when they want to use violence as their means.
As far as state rights and federal rights? Who cares. With the intrusiveness of the government after the patriot act and a slew of other state and federal laws I am more concerned about the rights of the individual.
ConnecticutMan1:
Standing up for individual rights can most effectively be done at the State level, by protecting the State's rights.
If the States fail to protect our individual rights, we will have no further non-violent recourse; given the corruption of our Federal elected officials.
Again, I am defending neither violence, nor a "free market run amok." I am defending individual rights within the existing legal framework.
I support secession (preferably non-violent) as a last resort, but we have not yet exhausted all of our other options.
Harold
Post a Comment