Can We Talk?
Is it still possible to have an honest, intellectual debate in this country without fear of retribution from the PC police? I mean, seriously. Can we talk?
Has it gotten so bad that common sense positions on issues can no longer be advanced if they don't meet some random, phony compassion threshold established by the self-appointed "enlightened" in our society?
In case you don't know, "enlightened," in this context, means anyone who disproportionately values what he/she perceives to be empathetic at that moment in time—over what are the long-term consequences, many of which are often quite deleterious to orders of magnitude more people than those who are the beneficiaries of so-called "enlightened" viewpoints.
The immigration debate is a perfect example. It's hard to fathom a rational thinker who wouldn't recognize that a country must be able to control its borders, and without respect for the rule of law, we'd have chaos and anarchy. Of course, that hasn't deterred the politically motivated and disingenuous among us from trying to frame this as a matter of discrimination and bigotry. Those who possess even an ounce of intellectual honesty must recognize the specious arguments posed by those with something to gain (e.g. votes). However, with the help of an agenda-driven mainstream media, many in the general populace, perhaps some of whom have difficulty thinking for themselves or are too lazy to independently analyze, believe it would be swell to impress those around them with their "enlightened" views—having little/no understanding of, or care for, the long-term consequences. As a result, communities and their citizens are seriously damaged.
Similar politically correct zeal has sprung up regarding a long-standing interpretation of the 14th amendment that says anyone born in the United States is a citizen of the United States, even though the parent(s) may be in the U.S. illegally. The PC police are working overtime on this one to scare and discredit all who would dare to support a position that says, 'you know what, should we really be allowing/incenting those who are breaking our laws from deriving a benefit from their law-breaking actions? Wouldn't it be reasonable to have some legitimate debate on the matter?'
Nope. You're an uncaring, racist troglodyte if you even want to discuss it, regardless of the fact that limited resources otherwise largely for the benefit of the less fortunate (but legal) are being seriously depleted as a consequence of the ostensibly uncontrolled flow of illegals into the country.
Just the other day, several weak-kneed Republican candidates, instead of supporting legitimate debate, have chosen to take the easy way out and be "enlightened." So much for a principled, in-depth examination of the subject.
That's too bad, because we all ultimately lose when issues are not evaluated on the merits, but rather on how we'll be perceived if we support one side or the other.
Can we talk?
Apparently, the answer is NO.
Joan Rivers, we need you.
Has it gotten so bad that common sense positions on issues can no longer be advanced if they don't meet some random, phony compassion threshold established by the self-appointed "enlightened" in our society?
In case you don't know, "enlightened," in this context, means anyone who disproportionately values what he/she perceives to be empathetic at that moment in time—over what are the long-term consequences, many of which are often quite deleterious to orders of magnitude more people than those who are the beneficiaries of so-called "enlightened" viewpoints.
The immigration debate is a perfect example. It's hard to fathom a rational thinker who wouldn't recognize that a country must be able to control its borders, and without respect for the rule of law, we'd have chaos and anarchy. Of course, that hasn't deterred the politically motivated and disingenuous among us from trying to frame this as a matter of discrimination and bigotry. Those who possess even an ounce of intellectual honesty must recognize the specious arguments posed by those with something to gain (e.g. votes). However, with the help of an agenda-driven mainstream media, many in the general populace, perhaps some of whom have difficulty thinking for themselves or are too lazy to independently analyze, believe it would be swell to impress those around them with their "enlightened" views—having little/no understanding of, or care for, the long-term consequences. As a result, communities and their citizens are seriously damaged.
Similar politically correct zeal has sprung up regarding a long-standing interpretation of the 14th amendment that says anyone born in the United States is a citizen of the United States, even though the parent(s) may be in the U.S. illegally. The PC police are working overtime on this one to scare and discredit all who would dare to support a position that says, 'you know what, should we really be allowing/incenting those who are breaking our laws from deriving a benefit from their law-breaking actions? Wouldn't it be reasonable to have some legitimate debate on the matter?'
Nope. You're an uncaring, racist troglodyte if you even want to discuss it, regardless of the fact that limited resources otherwise largely for the benefit of the less fortunate (but legal) are being seriously depleted as a consequence of the ostensibly uncontrolled flow of illegals into the country.
Just the other day, several weak-kneed Republican candidates, instead of supporting legitimate debate, have chosen to take the easy way out and be "enlightened." So much for a principled, in-depth examination of the subject.
That's too bad, because we all ultimately lose when issues are not evaluated on the merits, but rather on how we'll be perceived if we support one side or the other.
Can we talk?
Apparently, the answer is NO.
Joan Rivers, we need you.
It is really scary when "tolerance " morphs into acceptance of the complete destruction of our country. Arizonans that pass a law to enforce laws the federal gov't won't enforce, is now 'racial profiling' when in fact it is merely criminal profiling. I mean wholly crap batman the mexicans are the ones illegally entering the country...wouldn't it make sense to check their status if you stop them for something? Otherwise why even have a border? Maybe if we gave them California back they could completely turn around the shit hole that is Mexico, and they could stop invading our country. That would be a win win.
Reply to this
You always have the most creative solutions! I nominate you to be Fixer-n-Chief.
Reply to this
I have re-read a number of your blogs over the past several days. Although I do not always agree with your positions (particularly on immigration), your blogs are ALWAYS interesting, entertaining, and well written......not to mention, sometimes hysterical (Cox Communications 10/16/09). KEEP WRITING!!!
Reply to this