There's a crackdown over Miers, not a "crackup."
I love being a conservative. We conservatives are proud of our philosophy.
. . . even though pride as hubris is one of the seven deadly sins and we are actually unable to differentiate between real pride and hubris or arrogance of power.
Unlike our liberal friends, who are constantly looking for new words to conceal their true beliefs and are in a perpetual state of reinvention, we conservatives are unapologetic about our ideals.
. . . which means that we are dogmatic but do not understand that we cannot become completely static so that we will not grow and evolve, although we do change with the times despite our best efforts, but we still do everything we can to remain forever fixed; like a pool of stagnant pond scum.
We are confident in our principles and energetic about openly advancing them.
. . . and we are the only ones who can be; no non-conservative who acts, agitates, or speaks out against injustice can possibly be confident or energetic no matter how far they go to promote justice and equality for all.
We believe in individual liberty,
. . . as long as we get to preselect what choices you will make . . .
. . . as applies to big business interests who line the pockets of elected officials while lobbying . . .
. . . which is what we call avaricious corporatism . . .
the rule of law,
. . . as long as I'm not the one being busted for being a doper . . .
. . . my faith my way, and you better believe in it the way I tell you to . . .
a color-blind society
. . . as long as that color is white Anglo-Saxon protestant . . .
and national security.
. . . which we will enforce with totalitarian zeal and thoroughness.
We support school choice,
. . . as long as you can afford to pay the tuition for a private school . . .
. . . formed by confiscating your private property . . .
. . . for those rich enough to make campaign contributions . . .
. . . which means cutting benefits to the useless and non-productive who already aren't getting by; what do we need with a bunch of whorish welfare moms we would forbid to get abortions or even to use contraceptives, anyway . . .
. . . nevermind that entangling church and state is a clear and present violation of the Bill of Rights we say we love to espouse . . .
. . . as long as it kisses George Bush's ass and panders to our prejudices . . .
. . . unless Wal-Mart or some other transnational corporation wants your property to build on, or if you express within your property lines political speech that might offend a good, conservative neighbour . . .
and the war on terrorism.
. . . pissing away a bazillion dollars in an effort to eradicate sociological phenomena in which we play our part to bring to fruition, these United States being the largest terrorist state in the world.
And at our core we embrace and celebrate the most magnificent governing document ever ratified by any nation--the U.S. Constitution.
. . . despite all our efforts to repeal or have struck down the Bill of Rights.
Along with the Declaration of Independence, which recognizes our God-given natural
right to be free,
. . . even though the Bible doesn't say anything about a right to be free, and, in fact, Adam and Eve were sorely tried and punished for exercising their right to choose to eat the forbidden fruit; and that is why we need to protect the rights and freedoms of people today by forbidding some choices some people might make . . .
it is the foundation on which our government is built and has enabled us to flourish as a people.
. . . never mind that the founding fathers frequently spoke out against a church controlled state, but that we conservatives are too butt-stupid to understand simple and straight-forward English; never mind that we are working to recreate the oppressive establishment that our ancestors fled and repudiated.
We conservatives are never stronger than when we are advancing our principles.
. . . where "strong" means more dogmatic and more vicious and violent than those wimps and namby-pambies who think personal liberty is a good thing; after all, it's not persecution when one of use murders a physician for respecting the right of women to control their reproductive faculties by performing abortions, but it is persecution when they forbid us to dominate and posses women the way man was meant to.
And that's the nature of our current debate over the nomination of Harriet Miers. Will she respect the Constitution?
. . . and interpret it the way we need her to to get it out of the way? Will she respect our right to make laws respecting a Christo-fanatic Establishment and force infidels to pray the way we tell them to? To use our Bible and interpret it as narrowly and as arbitrarily as we need to?
Will she be an originalist who will
. . . do what she is told to do instead of thinking for herself . . .
accept the limited role of the judiciary to interpret and uphold it,
. . . and give the judiciary over to political oversight instead of maintaining judicial independence without which there can be no justice . . .
and leave the elected branches--we, the people--to set public policy?
. . . and act as the rubber stamp we want her to be instead of keeping the playing field level?
Given the extraordinary power the Supreme Court has seized from the representative parts of our government,
. . . in its efforts to create a more perfect union by constraining government, nevermind that we keep saying we love to limit government in a way that liberal, activist judges don't . . .
this is no small matter.
. . . in fact, our inability to browbeat judges who render decisions counter to our demands is not only not a small matter, it is the single largest stumbling block to building a more repressive state.
Roe v. Wade is a primary example of judicial activism.
. . . ignoring the fact that "judicial activism" is just a buzz-word used by petty and spiteful power tripping control freaks who lost their cases in court, and that Roe v. Wade epitomizes the individual liberty of choosing for one self how to live one's life; one of those liberties we love but must control so the People don't become immoral.
Regardless of one's position on abortion, seven unelected and unaccountable justices simply did not have the constitutional authority to impose their pro-abortion views on the nation.
. . . this authority should be granted instead to the vocal and hatefilled ultra-religious minority, a minority of approximately one third to one quarter, who know the One Real Truth that is above and beyond all the other One Real Truths that others profess to have.
The Constitution empowers the people, through their elected representatives in Congress or the state legislatures, to make this decision.
. . . and it is certainly in no wise the place of any court to interpret laws in such a way as to remove government authority over the private lives of We the People and actually give that authority to individuals.
Abortion is only one of countless areas in which a mere nine lawyers in robes have imposed their personal policy preferences on the rest of us.
. . . nevermind that I have the personal liberty to choose for myself whether or not to abort a pregnancy in the privacy of my own life since I would choose not to; the right for others to make their own choices in this matter, however, must belong to lawyers in suits who are taking bazillions of dollars in bribes through campaign funds and favors from lobbying, such as duck hunts and weekends at posh lodges, and who are more easily influenced by the noise generated by that minority that knows better than you how to live your life.
The court has conferred due process rights on terrorists detained at Guantanamo Bay
. . . and we all know that civil liberties and due process rights are only for those who don't break the law . . .
and benefits on illegal immigrants.
. . . which makes it harder for us to keep down those damned ethnics who immigrated here legally.
It has ruled that animated cyberspace child pornography is protected speech,
. . . just because it is rational to assume that no crime has been committed if no child was molested in the production of this pornography . . .
but certain broadcast ads aired before elections are illegal;
. . . which makes it more difficult for us to engage in election fraud . . .
it has held that the Ten Commandments can't be displayed in a public building,
. . . even though none of us conservatives really obey them anyway; after all, what is confiscation of private, residential-zoned property with a house on it to turn it into a big box store if not theft; or how does it honour my mother and father to be a pill-popping dope-head . . .
but they can be displayed outside a public building;
. . . which situation is intolerable because it respects the separation clause of the First Amendment which we love so much . . .
and the court has invented rationales to skirt the Constitution,
. . . which it is not supposed to do in ways that promote liberalism, only in ways that promote ultra-conservatism . . .
such as using foreign law to strike down juvenile death penalty statutes in over a dozen states.
. . . quite ignoring the fact that Age of Majority is circumvented when it becomes an inconvenience that doesn't let us execute a 14 year old (and who says we shall not kill, anyway?), but that we uphold most vociferously when we don't want the little bastards to read Judy Blume or Where's Waldo or have sex with an older partner even if that partner is still a legal minor.
For decades conservatives have considered judicial abuse a direct threat to our
Constitution and our form of government.
. . . quite ignoring the fact that some of our efforts are actually bent on overthrowing both by abusing judicial process.
The framers didn't create a judicial oligarchy.
. . . actually, they didn't create the kind of corporatist oligarchy that we promote either, but, of course, our kind of oligarchy is okay since it is ours.
They created a representative republic.
. . . which is supposed to represent only those whose political prejudices mirror ours.
Our opposition to judicial activism runs deep.
. . . because we can't win on a level playing field.
We've witnessed too many occasions where Republican presidents have nominated the wrong candidates to the court,
. . . actually nominating moderates and progressives who rule in favour of We the People instead of giving us carte blanche to control their lives like they need them to be controlled . . .
and we want more assurances this time--some proof.
. . . which means that we are disappointed, Mr. President, that you haven't gone far enough in tearing down the separation of church and state they way you implicitly promised you would, and if you don't smarten up and fly right and show us that you will we are going to lose faith in you; I certainly hope you don't think that all of your promises on the campaign trail were merely campaign promises.
The left, on the other hand, sees the courts as the only way to advance their big-government agenda.
. . . an agenda which would constrain government and big business from shitting all over private citizens; an agenda that respects and promotes civil liberties and an individual's right to be whomever he or she is without being discriminated against by church, state, or the corporations.
They can't win national elections if they're open about their agenda.
. . . which is why they have to come across as virtually indistinguishable from us conservatives, although we don't seem to be able to come up with a unique issue they can't co-opt.
So, they seek to impose their policies by judicial fiat.
. . . even though the sole function of the courts is to interpret laws that can only be passed by the legislative branch, and that for a court to actually make a law would egregiously violate the separation of powers the way President Bush did in issuing some of his Executive Orders.
It's time to call them on it. And that's what many of us had hoped and expected when the president made his nomination.
. . . because we are sick and tired of not being able to enslave the free people of this great country under the Holy Banner of the Protestant Crucifix and Bible.
Some liberal commentators mistakenly view the passionate debate among conservatives over the Miers nomination as a "crackup" on the right. They are giddy about "splits" in the conservative base of the GOP.
. . . even though such splits cannot possible exist, since "we conservatives are proud of our philosophy", which means we must be proud of it to the last man, woman, and child in the same way every Borg drone is proud of its place in the hive.
They are predicting doom for the rest of the president's term
. . . and the President's falling popularity numbers, his wholesale incompetence in responding to Hurricane Katrina, and his ensnaring us in another Viet Nam type quagmire have nothing to do with such predictions . . .
and gloom for Republican electoral chances in 2006.
. . . while we know that denying the existance of reality is the way to control it; along with a healthy dose of election fraud.
As usual, liberals don't understand conservatives and never will.
. . . whereas we understand that liberals are not with us, therefore they are all with the terrorists and unAmerican unpatriots.
The Miers nomination shows the strength of the conservative movement.
. . . which we are guessing since Miers is not clarifying her political leanings, so we assume she is one of us since she is stonewalling and obfuscating the way one of us would.
This is no "crackup." It's a crackdown. We conservatives are unified in our objectives.
. . . and any so-called conservatives who don't go along will be viciously punished for their lack of faith.
And we are organized to advance them.
. . . after all, even the evil liberal press admits that the left has its head jammed far up its ass; all our minions have to do is to blindly march and scream when, where, and what we tell them to.
The purpose of the Miers debate is to ensure that we are doing the very best we can to move the nation in the right direction.
. . . which only we can divine because we are the only ones with the One Real Truth; and making noise about this issue will distract everybody from other serious problems.
And when all is said and done, we will be even stronger and more focused on our agenda and defeating those who obstruct it,
. . . just as happened with Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Chairman Mao . . .
just in time for 2006 and 2008.
. . . when we will perpetrate other rounds of wholesale election fraud and re-enshrine our holy right-wing in power.
Lest anyone forget, for several years before the 1980 election, we had knockdown battles within the GOP. The result: Ronald Reagan won two massive landslides.
. . . we rooked them before, and we'll do it again; and keep on suckering them like the sheep We the People actually are!
The real crackup has already occurred--on the left! The Democratic Party has been hijacked by 1960s retreads like Howard Dean; billionaire eccentrics like George Soros; and leftwing computer geeks like Moveon.org.
. . . we, of course, use right-wing computer geeks like family values groups to promote assimilation into the right-wing rather than to disseminate information.
It nominated John Kerry, a notorious Vietnam-era antiwar activist, as its presidential standard-bearer.
. . . I mean, who does this fool think he is daring to exercise his freedom of thought and freedom of speech to criticize our holy and infallible republican government in its imperial pursuit to perpetrate atrocities and instill hatred in the uncivilized that will be expressed against us as terrorism? And then to run for president as if he were living in some kind of democracy where just anybody could do something like that?
Its major spokesmen are old extremists like Ted Kennedy
. . . Who should have been assassinated along with his brothers, but as a kind, compassionate, and christian person I would never say such a thing . . .
and new propagandists like Michael Moore.
. . . who is easy to smear because he is fat, doesn't shave, looks ugly and stupid as a result, and isn't any match for our propagandist, Karl Rove, anyway, or the impact of using the presidential bully-pulpit to illegally propagandize to the American sheeple.
Its great presidential hope is one of the most divisive figures in U.S. politics, Hillary Clinton.
. . . who we have vilified as a cheap slut for being a woman who is not sufficiently subservient to men.
And its favorite son is an impeached, disbarred, held-in-contempt ex-president, Bill Clinton.
. . . against whom we were never able to make any charges stick, except for one lousy marital pecadillo, but we can hold him in contempt simply because he's not one of us, so who needs an excuse, really?
The Democratic Party today is split over the war
. . . which is what it gets for allowing its members to choose for themselves instead of making them blindly toe the party line, again: we Borg do not have that problem, and if anyone tries something like that they are declared irrelevant (and traitors, unpatriotic, and unAmerican) . . .
and a host of cultural issues, such as same-sex marriage and partial birth abortion.
. . . which are just two of the civil liberties we must forbid to We the People in an effort to limit government and to promote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights,
It wants to raise taxes,
. . . and make the rich support the poor and middle-class, instead of them supporting us . . .
but dares not say so.
. . . for the same reason that we dare not fail to create a corporate-welfare-bum and wealthy class-welfare state; it would cost us contributions.
It can't decide what message to convey to the American people or how to convey it.
. . . because trying to understand and explain issues in-depth is confusing the people who are too stupid to get anything except our bivariate typology where you are: either/or.
And even its once- reliable allies in the big media
. . . the liberal press, those officious, self-rightous hack scribblers who insist on reporting facts about us instead of what we tell them to . . .
aren't as influential in promoting the party and its agenda as they were in the past.
. . . because We the People have lost as much faith in the press as they have in government of which they perceive the press to be subservient to.
The new media--talk radio, the Internet and cable TV--not only have a growing following, but have helped expose the bias and falsehoods of the big-media, e.g., Dan Rather, CBS News and the forged National Guard documents.
. . . except we won't go into the fact that much of those new media are alternate media which debunk our lies, smears, and propaganda about Rather and everybody else we savagely smear in an attempt to fuck them over.
Hence, circulation and audience is down, and dropping.
. . . although not nearly as fast as the President's approval rating.
The American left is stuck trying to repeat the history of its presumed glory
. . . just like we are, after all, we still stupidly insist that we are the party of Abraham Lincoln even though he's been dead for a hundred forty-odd years; but if we can deny the reality of biological evolution we can certainly deny that we have changed and evolved as a political party.
They hope people will see Iraq as Vietnam,
. . . never mind the clear and present parallels between them . . .
the entirety of the Bush administration as Watergate
. . . just because he was appointed to office by those lousy judicial activists on the Supreme Court; lousy slackers; what have they done for us since then, huh? . . .
and Hurricane Katrina as the Great Depression.
. . . since what happened there was only partly due to a failure of the Bush administration to fund the maintenance of facilities and works that were protecting the city; those funding failures were started by previous administrations anyway, and the predictions by experts about worsening weather patterns couldn't have been right since they meant cutting back on global corporatism and conspicuous consumption.
Beyond looking to the past for their salvation, the problem is that they continue to deceive even themselves.
. . . while we are obviously above that sort of thing since we are us and they are not.
None of their comparisons are true.
. . . but don't pay attention to the fact that our conservativist rhetoric and propaganda is not true either.
Meanwhile, we conservatives will continue to focus on making history.
. . . even though everything we do shows we have absolutely no capacity to learn the lessons of history, and we are, thereby, condemned to repeat them endlessly; even though we don't understand the dynamics of history any better than we understand that there can be a third position on issues, where someone can be against us as well as against the terrorists; even though the idea that only we can do something historic and others can't doesn't make any sense; even though . . . well . . . never mind.
Mr. Limbaugh is a radio-show host.
Rush Limbaugh is a loud-mouth blowhard with a bitch but no brains who is so woefully ignorant of the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Constitution it is laughable; he once said that the First Amendment was first for a reason, that the founding fathers had planned it that way, even though it was the third proposed amendment to be voted on and in light of the fact that the Eighth Amendment clearly states that all rights and freedoms listed in the American Bill of Rights are coeval.
This is the latest in our occasional series.
Further attacks and propagandizing will be forth coming as soon as some soft-on-terror, Godless commie liberal says something the right-wing feels is a threat to it.