Snowy Conservatives

I've tried to avoid writing this, but with the latest example having shocked me to my core, I figure it's time, so let's start with THE question: Why do conservatives feel the need to make nice with liberals?

It's not like both sides have valid points. Liberals are absolutely and totally irrational, while conservatives are… well. semi-rational.

Are you willing to accept the liberal vision for America? Do you think you can talk them out of it? Do you think there's room for compromise? Do you not get frustrated that you have never won a single person over? Or do you just like seeing your own views in print?

And did you miss the exchange I had with Kelly last Sunday?

She is arguably the nicest liberal you're likely to meet, and yet her views are so warped that I was left dumbfounded. I was first amazed by the realization that things she was saying amount generally accepted principles in her circles – Like the fact that Walmart should be forced to cover their employees' healthcare because "they can afford it."

But I was more amazed that she felt comfortable saying that to me. Aside from her comment being contemptible, it showed a stunning ignorance of both business and economics.

Beyond that, Kelly did what all liberals do – when she didn't like where a subject was going, she either changed course or abandoned it (since some of this exchange took place elsewhere, that may not be readily apparent).

So I ask again, what do you expect to gain by being nice? You don't think you're at war? I know what it is… you think Kelly is better than the rest and there's a chance you can reason with her?

Been there, done that.

Again and again.

Snowy initially stormed in here like a jackass. Then when he showed up again many months later, it was to discuss healthcare and compare America's system with his Australian future debacle. In the course of that, he showed that he could be a very nice guy himself.

The next time he returned was to celebrate Obama and his race speech. That didn't go well. What's worse, and this is key, he left thinking he'd gotten the better of me. Do you understand that it didn't matter whether he did or not?

Kelly probably didn't leave thinking the same, since the "debate" never became heated, but she left with her views intact – so she could very nicely inflict them on you again at the time and place of her choosing.

Now, are you thinking I'm being too hard on Kelly? If you are, it's why I feel there may be no hope for conservatives. But understand this: I gave Kelly what I thought was fair warning after another conservative gushed with appreciation for her and told her she was welcome anytime. I told Kelly (and again, this was elsewhere) that I also felt she was very nice – and that she was welcome whenever she was ready to renounce liberalism. Needless to say, I hoped my conservative friend would get the message as well.

Kelly, for her part, then decided to check out this blog and to express alarm for at the way I perceived all liberals – yes, ALL. She was right about that part, but she hoped I'd regard her differently. I do… I'd destroy her last.

But that's a failing on my part, since her very "niceness" might actually be more damaging to America, and when I'm being totally rational, I don't care whether you're a nice liberal… or a nice conservative. I care about what I see happening, and it only gets worse. Liberalism must be destroyed. Yes, I know that's no small task, especially since nice conservatives let those nice liberals get this far.

Look at it this way: one way or another, somebody is going to win…

How do you see that outcome?

And remember this: you can't "should have" anything…

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Advertisements

About tedwest

A longtime veteran of comedy and political forums, I decided that I needed a more restful venue because... well... I finally hate everybody. Except my wife that is... and my ex-wife.. and... no, that's about it. I lead about as simple a life as one can, preferring activities that include anything that doesn't involve going out and seeing YOU! And I particularly enjoy what I call "Get the Bitch" movies on Lifetime. You know the ones where the intended victim finally does something so incredibly stupid that she forfeits her right to live, and from that moment on you're rooting for the stalker. Of course, it rarely works out the way you want, but when it does, the feeling you get is... well, there's nothing else like it, other than, maybe, eating chocolate chip cookies. Oh, and I'm proudly anti-wildlife, both foreign and domestic, and anti-environment - especially foreign environments. I think Howard Stern put it best when he said, "If fifty percent of the population died tomorrow, I can live with that." And I feel the same about the other fifty percent, so together, we've pretty much got it all covered.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

36 Responses to Snowy Conservatives

  1. Lexann says:

    …especially since nice conservatives let those nice liberals get this far.They have gotten this far because one of the core beliefs of a conservative is "Mind Your Own Business" or "Live and Let Live". And conservatives generally, until forced to realize otherwise, believe that everybody believes that way. Conservatives don't want to meddle in your life, and they expect you to not meddle in theirs. The problems is, liberals DON'T want to live and let live. They very much want to meddle in your life, and dictate to America how they think things SHOULD be. From forcing American taxpayers to subsidize abortion and government housing to imposing government health care and removing economic incentive in order to be "fair". Still, conservatives don't see this; we keep slowly allowing the country to slip to the left because we don't see the threat created by the liberals, cause, well, they're so darned "nice"…as long as you do it their way. But it is a very real threat, and each time a liberal gets his way, it damages the whole country. It makes me think of that scripture, "A little leaven leavens the whole lump of dough." (Gal 5:9)But maybe I'm just clinging to my religion…now where's my gun?

  2. Snowy says:

    It isn't about "niceness". It's about how civilised people behave. It's about believing in democracy, and not just paying lip service to it. It's about discussing differences in an atmosphere of common courtesy, without resort to ad hominems and personal insults. It's about tolerance to another person's point of view. It's about respect.Liberals accept that conservatives have a different point of view, and recognise their right to voice those views. Liberals do not believe that conservatives should be destroyed. Liberals point to universal health care systems in other countries that cost one sixth of the private health system in the U.S., and wonder how anyone can defend the U.S. system. Liberals point to the Wall St train wreck that was brought to you by good old private enterprise, and wonder why "socialism" has suddenly become respectable with conservatives.Finally, I do wonder why you can't find something better to blog about than a couple of "dumb" liberals. I would have thought you'd be continuing to sing the praises of that fine example of a "smart" conservative, Saint Sarah.

  3. TedWest says:

    What planet are you on, and why does your word mean nothing?

  4. TedWest says:

    If you missed it, you're lucky, but I want you to know that Snowy had posted a reply, and in doing so, he violated several ground rules here:
    1) I don't want to hear liberals' opinions.
    B) Liberal criticism of McCain, Palin, Republicans or conservatives is irrelevant
    3) He didn't even attempt to answer my above questions.
    On the bright side, he did demonstrate an amazing lack of discipline, so at least he's got that going for him, which is nice.

  5. The road to hell is paved with good intentions (and the left-liberals are in the driver's seat). We need a parallel legal system one for the left-liberals and one for rational freedom loving people. They can tax and regulate them selves to death- just leave me alone.

  6. petermcc says:

    You had better block this response too, TedWest.It's a sad thing when a response is so effective you feel unable to defend your position.If you had left Snowy's post intact we could have considered your opinion but all you have done is make yourself appear threatened.A more intelligent approach would have been to withdraw the whole subject so we wouldn't have noticed.

  7. Darcy says:

    Zak, I think you just proved Lexann right. "Just leave me alone" is another what of saying "live and let live". The problem here is that it's not working. They are gaining ground because we let them.

  8. Scio, Scio says:

    I've tried both tactics, being nice and being mean. I used to call Snowy a stupid parrot and insinuate that he was high on crack cocaine. I ignore him now because I got nowhere being confrontational and I know that being nice is completely ineffective.
    It sucks. I really enjoy putting together a nicely-worded insult but then nobody comes to my blog. Or, I am apparently too nice and/or rational and idiots like Madonna show up to insult my wife.
    I've concluded that there is no way to actually convince someone to change their views, if they have the energy to write their opinions on the Internet. Get them to acknowledge your position maybe, but that's easy in a relativist system. If you're convinced you are right then it's extremely frustrating.
    Meh.

  9. Darcy says:

    People who are out out the mainstream with their ideas, lifestyle or whatever have two choices. 1. They can be nice. So nice that everyone they meet thinks, oh, how nice this person is, then they are not looking at what ever is out of whack. They disarm people with their niceness.

  10. TedWest says:

    Darcy, I was going to mention the same thing to Zak, but then somehow I got distracted…
    I think I need to focus more?!

  11. TedWest says:

    "I am apparently too nice and/or rational and idiots like Madonna show up to insult my wife."\
    LOL! Hang in there, you're young, you'll find a style that suits young a few decades.
    Seriously, I'm not kidding… you think I got this way overnight?

    On the bright side, I do believe this is the first time I've gotten others involved in naming names, so I call that progress!
    Seriously seriously, you guys are what makes this a little worthwhile. I used to love idiots to play off, but it is always the same old thing. If you read Snowy's comments on this, which I didn't, only the sidebar blurb, he's claiming that I wouldn't let him defend himself.
    Well, you'll note that on his comment that remains, he did sort of defend himself, and as surreal as it was, I left it, and you can read my reply… which required no further defense on his part…
    Which is why he posted none when he returned. It was merely an unfunny attempt at an insult fol,lowed by, how should I characterize it… "well-wishes" for success or rather lack thereof in the upcoming election.
    Not being a negative person by nature, I felt it brought me down, and worse, I fear it might do the same for my vast audience…so it had to go. Snowy's departure was just a side benefit.

  12. TedWest says:

    Petey Pie, not being around you idiot liberals much anymore, I forget how thick you are. Why would you suppose I care to have anything I do "considered" by you?
    And who's this "we" of which you speak, because I wanted my "we" to notice, which is why the subject is still here, you're participating in it, and I get to tell you to watch how you reply because the One Strike Rule is in effect?

  13. Lexann says:

    It's about tolerance to another person's point of view. It's about respect.Yeah. I'd like to see a little of that come our way for a change. Cafferty and Holmes and just about any outspoken lefty liberal I can think of are anything but respectful.Liberals accept that conservatives have a different point of view, and recognize their right to voice those views. Liberals do not believe
    that conservatives should be destroyed.Really? How about this, or this, or this? And if I had enough time, I'm sure I could easily find more. Perhaps you personally don't believe all conservatives should be destroyed, but the radical liberals (who are the majority of liberals) do. And you might be loathe to admit it, but you'd be just as happy to see all conservatives converted, or locked up until we confess our fidelity to the leftist religion.Liberals point to universal health care systems in other countries that
    cost one sixth of the private health system in the U.S., and wonder how
    anyone can defend the U.S. system.That is a leftist lie! No other health care system in the WORLD is equal to the U.S. Why do you think world leaders, when they need immediate and good care, come to the US? How about Canada? It's free, sure, if you can get it! And trust me, it isn't free. It costs the Canadian taxpayers more in taxes than they would pay for private insurance. The problem with the US system is that it isn't truly free. We are not accountable for health care costs. Do you know how much a visit to your General Practitioner costs? No, because your company subsidized insurance covers it. That's why cost are going up, there is no true free competition. See this. Liberals point to the Wall St train wreck that was brought to you by
    good old private enterprise, and wonder why "socialism" has suddenly
    become respectable with conservatives.The Wall Street train wreck was started by the market practice by Congressionally Chartered: Fannie-mae and Freddie-mac of packaging high-risk debt into MBS and selling them on the open market as safe securities. Also the pressure on banks by, you guessed it, the government to force them to make loans to high risk borrowers. And don't forget the Sarbanes-Oxley Act that forced the questionable mark-to-market accounting practice to be accepted by private enterprise. That's not free market. If the government would stay OUT of Wall Street and allow true free enterprise, we wouldn't have this mess. No conservative is suddenly considering Socialism as an answer to this financial crisis. Why do you think so many people called their Congressmen and insisted that they vote "No" to the $700B bailout? People aren't stupid. We know that throwing more money into the hands of a Socialist plan is not the answer, it just burdens the US taxpayer with generations of debt.I would have thought you'd be continuing to sing the praises of that fine example of a "smart" conservative, Saint Sarah. What were you saying about respect?

  14. Lexann says:

    Oops! Forgot to hit the "reply" button. The above entry is in response to Snowy.

  15. Lexann says:

    …a little dog that never wears out. Throw that ball for six straight
    hours and he is still running after it and bringing it back.Ha! Ha! What a great visual! So applicable!

  16. TedWest says:

    Lexann,
    Snowy regrets that he could not be reached for comment.

  17. Darcy says:

    Oh you hit it dead on with the above reply! I'm just nuts with the way they are painting this as a republican crisis when even Bill Clinton himself admitted what the real problem was.

  18. TedWest says:

    It depends on how you look at it, I think. I mean, is it considered a group if they all share one brain?
    I kinda feel that I did my part today to destroy any illusion that there's hope for compromise. Conservatives need to understand that they are the only one's who may have had that hope.

  19. Darcy says:

    You are right. Any compromise means that we, right thinkers, have let them have something their way. That means we lost.

  20. Lexann says:

    Ted, did you finally block Snowy?

  21. TedWest says:

    The simple answer is, yes. Here's the longer one…
    Of course, he can petition the court to reconsider, but should that occur, he's going to have to agree to be a lot more sane when he posts here in the future or he'll be called out on strikes if the pitch is even in the same zipcode as the plate.

  22. petermcc says:

    I do apologise. I thought you were trying to reach the undecided not preach to the converted. My mistake.Please carry on.

  23. TedWest says:

    I'd have preferred you apologized for being British and injecting yourself into something when you had no relevance here whatsoever.

  24. TedWest says:

    Petey bites the dust.
    His second follow-up post failed to meet minimum standards, and I'm simply not interested in liberal small talk which, as you may be aware, is very small indeed.
    Two down. One wonders how many liberals it takes to form a single rational thought?

  25. Endeesea says:

    There's heaps of tasty tid-bits here. Maybe that should be Ted-bits? No rational debate, or even discussion, just "I'm right & you're all wrong" rhetoric which frankly, is oh-so common from right-wingers in the blogosphere.

  26. TedWest says:

    Interesting challenge, son, because it's a longstanding one I've offered to liberals since I started:
    And since I'm the host, you get to pick the subject, so how great is that for you?

  27. TedWest says:

    I wasn't aware, and you didn't disclose, that you're an Australian. As such, you have, of course, ridiculously little significance here, but I will still consider your subject request as an international gesture of goodwill, and to remain in Snowy's thoughts.

  28. daddy-fu says:

    Geez, people – as insignificant as I am given I'm from a certain continent in the southern hemisphere (and, even better, hold dual citizenship with – wait for it – a scandinavian country run by doggone socialists) – can't we all just get along?

  29. TedWest says:

    Sure… until you say something stupid, but I should warn you, that unnamed country thing was borderline. Also, if you don't think the name accorded to that whole bunch-o-countries, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Latvia is significant enough to deserve capitalization, why should anyone accord it/you any?
    Sure, I understand the all-smalls are keeping with the principles of socialism, but then I'm not trying to make an impression on you, if you see what I mean?

  30. daddy-fu says:

    Mate, whatever. It's ok Ted, I don't think I'll drop by here again.
    Heads-up though – Latvia's not a scandinavian country, it's more commonly considered to be a "baltic state". I'd suggest that Denmark is the fourth one you're thinking of.
    All the best.

  31. TedWest says:

    You don't even know your own regions? Lithuania, Estonia, and Denmark are the Baltic States. You really should watch Red Eye. You might learn something…
    And thank you for not dropping by again.

  32. Endeesea says:

    I thought you'd wake up sooner or later, Ted, so didn't see any need to 'disclose' anything regarding my national allegiances. I'd have thought you'd have held off on the ad hominem insults until we actually engaged, but seeing as you don't seem to want to engage, but rather cast personal abuse, insult and logical fallacy from the anonymity of a weblog, am I to presume that you're conceding before I've even taken the opportunity of selecting a subject?I, on the other hand, take great delight in logical, rational discussion with my ideological opposites, so I'll cut you a little slack, as you Yanks say. Keep an eye on my blog, and this thread. I'll be putting my challenge to you in my blog, and letting you know here when I've done so. Of course, if you choose not to engage, I'll understand completely. Oh, by the way, I don't ban anyone from my weblog, because I value open-minded exchange of ideals. Bring your crew by all means. I'll be bringing mine.

  33. TedWest says:

    No, we're not doing things your way. we're doing them my way. That means we agree on a subject, only you and I participate, and we do it here.
    I've stated before that there is no liberal position that can stand the test of reason, and while that's a provocative generalization, I haven't come across one yet that has any merit.
    Now you can play any game you want, but you came here, you challenged me, I accepted, and you're not going to switch venues so that you can feel more comfortable and set your own rules, and the reason I'm adamant about this is because I've seen what passes for logic among liberals, and on your blog, there's no way to hold you accountable.
    If this isn't agreeable, don't comment further about it. I have no patience for nonsense. And I do ban people because the only reason a liberal can claim to have an open mind if because he has a hole in his head, Snowy being Exhibit A.

  34. Endeesea says:

    I love the smell of fear in the morning. Or indeed, anytime for that matter.

  35. TedWest says:

    "As a conservative… you will…"
    You've obviously not familiarized yourself with my commentary, or you wouldn't have said something that stupid. Here's some insight: I think George Bush is the worst President there will ever be – unless Obama is elected and immediately removes the stigma.
    Now, your name wouldn't by chance be Blake? I ask because your pomposity is reminiscent of a once and present idiot whom I had the pleasure to demolish back when.
    I purposely hadn't gone to you blog because I didn't want to prejudice myself before you had a chance to take advantage of my generous offer to debate such an inconsequential citizen of the world.
    Having now perused your musings, such as they are, I can completely understand why you have no need to block anyone – people just fall asleep while trying to compose a response to the dreary drivel.
    And I realized that even before wading into your profile.
    WARNING to readers: I went there so you wouldn't have to.
    Now there's no need to thank me for this, but I thought I'd provide you with a bit of triteness myself as a goodwill gesture.
    Over in NDCland, you said:

    If you could choose your own name, what would it be?
    Niall Muirdeach Eochaid (append surname here)
    I'm enamored with the Irish Gaelic.
    It's "enamored OF." "With" makes you look pedestrian, and I know you don't want that.
    Btw, NDC? "Not done contemplating?" As in, your navel?
    Now, I'm just about out of patience. If you have nothing material to say, I'd advise you to post whatever other comments you may have on your own page – where no one will see them.
    But I'll leave you with this thought: the reason you're here is because there is no one you know who's capable of engaging in any sort of logical discussion – and you think you are. There's only one way you'll have a chance to prove it. Remember, I read as much of your blog as I could stand… and to my horror I also read the comments.
    But if it's any consolation, you make Snowy look like a kangaroo with a keyboard.

  36. TedWest says:

    And another one bites it for persisting in trying to lure me back to his dungeon. I pity those who are more vulnerable.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s