It's far worse. They matter so much that they don't want you to hear them – or give anyone a platform to present them.
I saw a reporter attacked in Copenhagen today. It's because the issue of global warming is settled in their teeny, tiny ostrich minds. The reporter was talking to Neil Cavuto when the crowd became unruly. First came the random catcalls, then came chanting, and then singing. Suddenly, someone Berlusconied the reporter with something in the fruits and vegetables food group.
With the feeling of imminent real danger palpable, Cavuto tried to get the Irish fellow to safety when he said, "I've seen worse in Belfast on a Friday night?"
That sent the "protesters" scurrying to check Irish newspaper archives for ideas.
I've been very hard on conservatives, and I'll continue to be until they at least realize that passivity is no longer an acceptable counter-measure against the insane. But therein lies the biggest obstacle. You know all liberals are insane, but you fail to realize what that means. The law precludes the mentally ill from doing many things, and the dangerous ones get put away.
All liberals are dangerous. If you doubt that, consider a reply I got from Snowy which I didn't approve for obvious reasons as I'm sure you'll see as you read:
Man made climate change… Neither of us can know who is right. Just as the denialists point to believers with hidden agendas, so it is also true to say that denialists also have hidden agendas, even your beloved Taranto. You don't rally(sic) think that he's about truth, do you. He's about protecting profits of those who pay him well to propagate their point of view. Sheesh! And you call me stupid! (Editor's note: "stupid" is one of the more complimentary things I call him)
But at the end of the day, if the believers are wrong, we'll still have done something about conserving finite energy sources. If the denialists are wrong, then a lot of people are going to suffer. I don't know if you have any kids or not, but I happen to care what sort of world I leave my three. I don't need a Taranto to figure that out for me.
How do you respond to any of that with anything but ridicule? At minimum? And I concede that Snowy is one of the least insane liberals I've encountered. When he rereads his comment, I'm sure he'll see nothing wrong with anything he wrote – it all makes sense to him, and he'll fault me for not offering a counter-argument.
And I admit that my original intent was to take his comments point by point, but what point would there be in that? It's easier to argue with a child that it is someone whose entire life experience has lead him to such irrational conclusions.
So we stand, as Bobo said yesterday, on the "precipice," one, he indicated, that represented an accomplishment if all the Dems fell off and voted us into health care oblivion.
But I agree that we all stand on the precipice, and we don't know how much more our society can take before we're all in free fall.
But we do know that the general answer is "not much." And we also know that members of Congress will be the last to join us in our fall. We keep thinking that something will intervene to restore sanity before it's too late. But when you compound insanity with corruption, and you see that those people are one and the same – people who have cut off all debate, and put roadblocks up on the traditional avenues that would lead to corrections… when you see that ACORN has its tentacles into virtually all aspects of government and political correctness has overwhelmed our military in both it's make-up and in how we wage war, you know that you're the last line of defense.
Sure you can sit by, do nothing, and wait. It only took Russia 75 years to realize its "error." So how bad could it get? I mean, we're not Russia. But if you decide to fight back, realize that you can't reason with the sort of things that come from Snowy, and even if you try, one of his cohorts will hit you with a tomato – or worse. Because reason has no place in their world. And it will have no place in yours if they prevail.
I saw all this coming, and you probably did too, but I admit that I didn't anticipate how quickly the destruction would come and how vast it would be, but in my defense, I was under the illusion that more people were rational than there actually are, and I thought that if all else failed, the military would save us. So while this isn't the first time I was wrong (I thought McCain was the most viable candidate of the bunch – although that was actually true)…
This time it's serious.
You don't debate the criminally insane