Yesterday, I spent a couple of hours at the Republican booth at Nokesville Day in Nokesville, Virginia. The weather was great, but the day’s main event, the parade, had finished hours ago. So the crowds were dwindling, and I was bored. When an obvious Democrat, someone manning the Democrat’s booth walked by, I decided to have a little fun. I offered him some of our literature, and that led to brief discussion.
For a little while I managed to get the fellow to consider whether our politicians spend our money in accordance with the Constitution. We got there when I asked him why he was a Democrat, and he ignorantly said the Republican Party was the party of the rich. I pointed out that was not true, and then I said the real difference between the two parties is over who controls spending the taxpayer’s money and all those government regulations. Would we not be better off with less government and control over our own money? As it is, we don’t even know how the government spends all our money.
In response, that Democrat said something amazing. He said he did know how the government spends our money. Most of it goes into Social Security and Medicare, and 75 percent of the discretionary spending goes into Department of Defense. Since that is a rather low level of detail, it awed me that anyone would presume that such a factoid would equate to certain knowledge as to where the Feds are spending our money. So I just pointed out what he is calling discretionary spending is authorized by the Constitution and what he is calling mandatory spending is not even mentioned in the Constitution. He then said that Constitution implies such powers. What galled me about that is that when I asked this guy what the Constitution is for he said the Constitution says what the Federal Government is suppose to do.
I think at some point after that this fellow began to realize he was not making any sense. So he fell back on an old Democrat strategy. He blamed Bush for the state of our economy and the deficit. 🙄 I suppose that since George W. Bush was a Republican and I am a Republican that rendered anything I believe irrelevant?
To win their arguments, what Democrats generally do comes down to one of three things.
1. They attack the character of their opponents (This reblog provides a classic example.).
2. They use the end to justify the means. How many times, for example, have we heard the argument that it is for the children? And instead of debating whether what they propose is morally right, Democrats resolutely attack their opponents as being hateful of some defenseless group.
3. They buy off the opposition. That is largely what pork is all about, and this is actually their preferred solution. That’s why there are so many RINOs.
So what can Conservatives do? We have to stick to the fundamentals. When Democrats start in on some form of character assassination or try to buy us off, we have to stick to the fundamentals. We have to remind people why the end does not justify the means. And if we don’t know why the end does not justify the means, then we have some homework to do. What’s the best reference for the difference between right and wrong? It’s the Bible.
The Left’s responses to various stimuli are now so predictable they’re practically Pavlovian:
- You criticize the president or his goals? You’re racist.
- You criticize Hillary? You’re sexist and/or you’re “scared” of “strong women”.
- You object to the way Mozilla’s CEO lost his job? You hate gays.
And if you try to discover the truth about a possible Democrat scandal, you’re accused of “McCarthyism“.
View original post 740 more words