Connect with us

Democrats

Rules for the Rational: Stop trying to use every situation for political advantage

Published

on

Rules for the Rational Stop trying to use every situation for political advantage

It should simply be outside the norms of decency to exploit someone else’s pain and suffering.

It’s inevitable that as soon as a tragedy takes place, certain people will try to exploit the situation to their advantage. It should simply be considered bad form to use these events to divide instead of unify based on the raw emotions present after a horrific event. These are people who go by the infamous words of Rahm Emanuel:

“You never let a serious crisis go to waste.”

This is not to say people cannot express their opinions, but basic societal decency should be the standard instead of that kind of cynicism. The people who engage in this sort of activity know that they using the raw emotion to further their cause at the expense of others, those who are rational should shun these tactics.

The hierarchy of exploitation.

Many times there is a hierarchy of exploitation endemic to the use of tragedy, with several of a myriad of possibilities thrown into the mix such as:

Liberty Control
Climate Change
Transgenderism
Racism
Wealth disparity
Anti-Semitism
Collectivism
Political correctness

The problem for the exploiters is they can’t do all of them at once, so a priority has to be set-up depending on the issues involved. Then there the rankings in some multifaceted hierarchies such as in Liberty control realm. These range from control of free speech to the right of self-defense.

In many cases, certain issues will take precedent over others for the spotlight. Sometimes it’s just a matter of which issue will gain the most traction at the moment. In the case of Liberty Control, the denigration of the right of self-defense seems to be on the wane, so other forms will be pushed forward. For example, control of free speech by those who pretend to champion Liberty will pay dividends down the road for the self-defense opponents.

Examples of how tragedies are exploited in the case of Liberty Control.

Those who dwell in such tactics have even produced a booklet on the practice: A Gun Violence Messaging Guide.

In the section entitled: HIGH-PROFILE GUN VIOLENCE INCIDENTS

They have set of ‘rules’ to follow in exploiting these situations

  • Don’t Hesitate To Speak Out
    “The truth is, the most powerful time to communicate is when concern and emotions are running at their peak.”
  • Don’t Assume The Facts – And Don’t Wait For Them
  • Never Apologize.
  • Don’t Let Policyspeak Drain The Emotion From The Moment.

An emotionally-driven conversation about what can be done to prevent incidents such as the one at hand is engaging. A dry conversation about legislative process and policy is far less engaging.

Choice of language, constantly connecting the policy to how it impacts people’s lives, and avoiding being dragged into the nuances of specific policy prescriptions are all critical here.

The exploitation begins soon after a tragedy.

In the case of the massacre at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, it was only a few hours before the Liberty grabbers to chimed in with the tired ‘Easy access to guns’ propaganda:

Then the Democrats chimed in calling for people to vote for them a day later.

Followed by Howard Dean called for http://Gab.com to‏ ‘be tried for being an accomplice to murder’:

Finally, there is this quip from Piers Morgan that those one the Pro-liberty side compromise once again and give up some more of our Liberty:

The fact is, in this particular case those conserving Liberty have compromised over the decades time and time again, but it is never enough. Each time a little bit of Liberty is given up, only to see more demands later on with the onset of yet another ‘serious crisis’. ‘Giving up’ one type of firearm will just see the demand for the same for other types later on since there have been over 70 instances where the demand has been made for gun confiscation.

The Takeaway

Those who dwell in the rational world know that making changes in the heat of an emotional moment never ends well. Since it only encourages similar demands with another crisis later on.

If something is a bad idea, it shouldn’t be considered rational during a tragedy with emotions running high. These should be rejected along with those who would use the suffering of others to gain political power.

Advertisement

0

Democrats

Desperate Beto O’Rourke repeats lie that Trump called KKK members ‘very fine people’

Published

on

Desperate Beto ORourke repeats lie that Trump called KKK members very fine people

A popular technique used by Nazis before and during WWII was to tell a big lie often and loudly. Their theory was if you tell the same lie over and over again, eventually it would be accepted as the truth. It’s ironic that Democrats like Beto O’Rourke are invoking this Nazi technique to tie President Trump to the KKK. It’s also quite sad as the once-high-flying progressive hero has fallen so far that he must rely on controversy just to stay relevant. His poll numbers are that bad.

His latest attempt to play the race card against anything and everyone who doesn’t agree with him has him repeating the tired old lie that has been perpetuated by mainstream media and propped up by social media. But even worse is the fact that some search engines are keeping stories accepting the false claims ranked higher than the fact check stories that debunk the claim.

Once and for all, President Trump did not call KKK members “very fine people.” During the Charlottsville protests, white supremacists were present. But also included in the crowd on the right were average citizens who were upset about the take down of American historical monuments. As the President noted and as has been verified by independent sources, these “very fine people” were among the white supremacists. It’s possible to support a goal but not hold the ideology of others who support the same goal. Just because I don’t want monuments taken down doesn’t mean I’m a white supremacist. I’m not even white.

Here is what the President actually said, with the extremely important last portion of his statement conveniently omitted from all progressive media reports. They took him out of context so blatantly and heinously because they NEED the people to believe he’s racist. Emphasis and bracketed notes have been added, since progressive media and Beto O’Rourke clearly lack reading comprehension skills.

“You had some very bad people in that group [referring to neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and KKK members]. But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name… I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.”

A plain-text reading of the President’s statement make O’Rourke’s recent Tweet either the product of his own stupidity or an unambiguous bald-face lie.

There are millions of Americans who disagree with President Trump over policies. There are some people who aren’t happy with his results so far. Both of these are open for proper discourse in the form of criticism, praise, or debate. But let’s try to keep the lies to a minimum. I understand the race card is all the Democrats have left, but they should try harder to make plans that work (or embrace the GOP’s plans that are already working) instead of stooping to name-calling and promoting false narratives.

There are only two possibilities. Either Beto O’Rourke is extremely unintelligent, lacking in basic reading comprehension skills, or he is a blatant liar so desperate for attention that he’ll say anything for a headline. He needs to be pitied.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

There will be no climate change debate because the DNC is scared of what would be said

Published

on

There will be no climate change debate because the DNC is scared of what would be said

Climate change activists were extremely vocal at the annual summer for the Democratic National Committee. They’re upset that climate change is effectively missing from the first two debates and have demanded a single-issue debate focused on the environment. But DNC leaders haven’t budged after declaring there would be no such debate.

This isn’t surprising. Conservatives may look at progressives and assume everyone in the Democratic Party is a flaming tree-hugger, but the reality is climate change ranks very low on the list of real concerns for actual voters. If it weren’t for the loud but small group of radical progressives who have been driving the agenda for the Democratic Party since President Trump was elected, climate change would still be an issue of passing importance on the periphery that it has been for decades.

It’s not that climate change isn’t a concern. It’s that it’s not a primary concern to most voters. Democrats are worried about it as they’re flooded with propaganda by progressive media, but compared to putting food on the table or paying for their kid’s braces, climate change is a distant concern.

Nevertheless, it’s an issue that’s important enough to talk about for Democrats because their party holds the edge on the matter in the eyes of anyone who believes it’s an issue at all. The ranks of Americans who believe man-made climate change is a real concern are growing. Polls show a majority of Americans who think it’s something that deserves attention are high even among Republicans. Considering the GOP stance on climate change ranges from mild interest to outright denial, one would think the Democrats would take advantage of this.

They won’t. They can’t. Today’s candidates aren’t Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton calling for incremental action to address climate change over the next three decades. Today’s leading candidates, especially Bernie “Green New Deal” Sanders and Elizabeth “Bold Action” Warren, are speaking of radical changes when they’re talking to their base. And lower ranked candidates are even more expressive of their concerns in hopes the environmentalist crowd can help propel them to the upper tier in the race for the nomination.

Candidates can’t speak boldly on a topic to their base and then give more moderate responses to a national audience. In today’s social-media-driven society, major contradictions are captured. They go viral. Then candidates have to answer for their reversals. Therefore, whatever the candidate tell radical progressives in small gatherings about their climate change plans must be the same thing they say during a nationally televised debate.

The DNC realizes this would be the kiss of death for their White House ambitions. If mainstream moderate American voters, who often receive their only exposure of candidates during televised debates, were to hear the insane ideas most of the candidates are proposing, they will quickly warm to the idea of reelecting President Trump.

The moment a candidate talks about limiting air travel, they’ve lost 2020.

The first Democrat to say we need to be driving electric cars exclusively by 2030 will get demolished in the general election.

Some may point out these policy proposals are available to the public already, but availability does not highlight the issue to the vast majority of Americans. But on the debate stage where consistency must be maintained, they’re done the moment they announce their real perspectives on the issue.

If moderates and independents heard the things Democratic candidates were proposing to tackle climate change, any hope of beating President Trump would be lost. The DNC won’t risk letting the radical truth come out in a debate.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Democrats

Tucker Carlson: Moderates aren’t welcome in the Democratic Party anymore

Published

on

Tucker Carlson Moderates arent welcome in the Democratic Party anymore

It’s true. If you’re a moderate, your ideas are anathema to the Democratic Party. Oh, there are still moderate Democratic voters out there. Otherwise, Joe Biden wouldn’t be leading the polls, though even Biden has taken several pages out of the hyper-leftist policy playbook since announcing his candidacy in April. But the radical progressive wing of the party is taking over and many Democratic voters are following their lead.

This is why, as Tucker Carlson put it, this is a two-person race. Which radical will emerge at the end, Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders? Warren has had the upper hand since the debates, but Sanders hopes his more-radical Green New Deal proposal will resonate with the far left enough that they’ll give him back his mantle as the socialist of choice.

Noteworthy in Carlson’s commentary is the fact that the DNC declined having a climate change debate. Why? Because the last thing they want is for their candidates to be spouting off radical proposals to deal with climate change on national television. They don’t mind it when candidates are talking to the base, but considering many Americans have their only exposure to the candidates during the ultra-hyped televised debates, the DNC doesn’t want the candidates scaring moderates towards the Republicans.

Conservatives were so concerned about Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, and rightfully so. But this new batch of Democratic presidential candidates are completely detached from reality. It’s radical progressivism or hit the road for today’s Democrats.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending