| The anti-immigration movement is another really interesting point. I used to know a lady on the net who had her own, fairly sizable anti-immigration group going. She controlled it completely.. never let anyone in the groups know who the other group members were. For example, no one could post, and she had it set up herself, so that it was impossible to contact other members. She really believed in what she was doing, or so it seemed.. She always tried to keep up the level of anger to a fairly high pitch, and she did her own research and broadcast her findings and useful links to articles, etc. to her whole group. I used to tell her, that the anti-immigration movement would eventually come back to bite conservative interest groups, overall, if it wasn't played right. Believe it or not, a lot of already immigrated people are against further immigration, because they know that if there are too many of them, taking jobs and benefits, it can hurt their personal interests. But, if you let the anti-immigration movement take the a sort of seemingly racist tone, it can be very alienating. Sure enough, over a period of several years, this is exactly what it did.. And, the greater part of the Latino population, who had been previously politically neutral and disengaged (and who I saw as being the most natural conservative people, focused on better futures for their family, property ownership, and having a strong religious culture) turned against the conservative movement in this country, en masse, when the rhetoric became too loud. I remember when I really noticed this, being introduced in the popular media, that I knew for sure that a political schism was in the making, and that there must be money behind the campaign.. because loud, noisy campaigns are always driven by special interest groups with money. That was really it, I think.. We missed our opportunity to embrace America's largest and most rapidly growing conservative culture, and sent them to the other side. I see American values as being something with the capacity to cross all demographic lines. Being an American isn't about the color of your skin, or where you came from. it's the freedom to live out your ideals and dreams in a society which promotes strong families, a system of work and reward, property values, religious and intellectual freedom. In some ways, the Mexican people are more conservative than most US born families are. It was really a wasted opportunity to reach out to these people. And, it is really not much use to argue as to whether they should be here, or not. They are here, and we can only make the most of it. Now, they are still here, but they are being mobilized against us, and radicalized. No bueno, mi amigos! At one time, many years ago, the spokesman for the Republican party came on as a guest to a radio show I listened to, and I called in to express these views. The guy was so excited that you could almost hear him, jumping up and down. He said, "She's got it! That's exactly right, and this is how we should do it.. We should reach out to these people and bring them into the (Republican) party" (paraphrased). Meanwhile, this stupid twit of a woman are running their mouths, maligning the Mexicans and setting the stage for the debacle which I predicted would follow. It really disgusts and disappoints me, so. This is why I got so angry with the pseudo-AR rhetoric (promoting more breeder licensing and regulation, "our way") by the leader of a big, national <ahem> "anti-AR" group. Animal ownership is a property ownership right, in my opinion. It is not about how we treat animals, or whether or not they have feelings or are little, furry kids. If we cannot protect our own property rights on this one front (of which the animal ownership front is only one, currently under attack), we have already lost the fight. The one thing we have all made the mistake of doing, all these years, is letting the anti-ownership activists place all the arguments on the table, and confuse the core issues. --- On Fri, 9/25/09, Capri <SophieCapri@shaw.ca> wrote:
From: Capri <SophieCapri@shaw.ca>
Subject: Re: dog_anti-rescue_anti-peta_new fish vs farmer
To: dog_anti-rescue_anti-peta_new@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, September 25, 2009, 1:24 PM Yes, and that sure is true on the net. All you ever see on the net is the left shouting about how the right consists of nothing but lies and what they call "racism" and "anti-tolerance" blah blah blah, while what little right representation out there is mostly anti-immigration and they aren't speaking out nearly as loudly or as much about how the left is lying and intolerant themselves. Capri ----- Original Message ----- Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 12:12 PM Subject: Re: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new fish vs farmer I don't want to be a meany and discourage anyone from following / supporting their own political party. I do believe that we need and benefit from a two-party system in this country. That said, please do not be blindly supportive. It's up to everyone to keep their own house clean. Republicans are pretty good at sniffing out and rejecting the crooks and RINO sell outs in the party.. but, strangely, that seems to be our undoing, because the Democrats focus on solidarity, and honor the spoils system, first and foremost. Democrats tend to be stronger as a political force these days. It almost seems that the Republican party is dying off. Very sad, to the extent that there is far less representation for little people who are not represented under collective bargaining units. --- On Fri, 9/25/09, Wakanska <wakanska2003@ yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Wakanska <wakanska2003@ yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new fish vs farmer
To: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new@yahoogroups. com
Date: Friday, September 25, 2009, 11:03 AM | I think that they have.. You just weren't paying attention. You've got to look closely and start asking questions. Living in this society is like eating in a dark restaurant. Everything looks good, seems nice and pretty, but if you turned on the lights and got a look at what was going on in the kitchen, it might be a whole different picture. People hide their dirty deeds and their selfish agendas.. that's everyone, whether bad dog breeders, criminal animal rights activists, bad cops and prosecutors, politicians. No one is lilly white, but the worst ones of all are masters of disguise and camoflage... They always make it seem like they are the good guys, and part of the way they do this is by painting everyone else with a bad brush. The more people are looking at the scapegoats and fall guys, the less heat and attention on the phoney-baloneys. This is a common situation with politicians. They take advantage of public opinion, even if it is faulty, to get what they want. For example, when they wanted Indian land to steal, they made even the peaceful, "civilized" tribes out to be a menace. This is what happened to the Cherokee, Choctaw, Seminole, Creek and Chickasaw people before the great removal, the "Trail of Tears". Those people bent over backwards, even adopting all the white man's ways, trying to remain on good terms and in their own homelands. They even helped Andrew Jackson to win important battles in the War of 1812, which gave him the presidency.. Then he rewarded them by signing the declaration to remove them all to the new territories in Oklahoma (one of the most shameful and tragic events in US history). I see the same thing happened to the Jews.. Hitler wanted their accumulated wealth, and land, and he needed prisoner labor to accomplish his goals. The fact that Germany and Europe in general had a long history of anti-semitism merely made his job easier. It's always the same.. Someone wants something, and they can only get it by stealing, so they have to violate the owners, but first begins the preparatory phase of maligning that section of society you want to violate, so that the rest of society will accept and even participate in the rape. This is the real nature of politics.. the manipulation and exploitation of cultural groups within society, usually by means of propaganda, and eventually, force, under the color of authority. It's a surgical procedure, in a way, and the tools are public opinion, then declarations or law, and finally, law enforcement. Thomas.. If you believed all this time that the Democrat leaders were all really nice guys, you are only typical. Most nice people are naive enough to believe that most other people are nice, honest folk. We take people at face value, and if they say that they want to do something good, we believe them. In a way, we are also guilty of the harm that they bring, because we must accept our part in the role play that they need to succeed in their dirty deeds. It's actually a dependant / co-dependant relationship. It only works for the dependants (criminals who need us to fall for their ruses), because we are trusting and naive. What does the Bible say? "Be ye subtle as serpents, but gentle as doves".. which basically translates into: "Be a nice guy, and harmless to others, but don't be a schmuck by falling for deceptions of malevolent people". It's up to us to see through the wool the tricksters are pulling over our eyes. Historically, the Republican and Democrats split into two parties in the US, when the Whig party disappeared. If I am not mistaken, Andrew Jackson was the first Democrat president. At that time, the Democrat party represented landowners and growers, in the south. They were also slave owners, and ever expanding into new territories, because as growers, they required two things: land, and slaves. As they expanded into the new territories, looking for more land to put under the plow, they brought their slaves along with them, a practice which the northern states disapproved (they saw it as an expansion of slavery, which theyonly tolerated as something very limited in scope). Of course, this contention eventually led to the Civil War, and the one on the side of the slave abolishionists was President Abraham Lincoln, who was a Republican. The other interesting Republican president to me was Teddy Roosevelt.. Interesting, because both he and President Lincoln basically prepared the country for the abolishing of slavery, and the formation of a National Park System, to protect our natural heritage. Yet, curiously, these same platforms have been hijacked by the Democrats, as if they were always behind ecology protections and civil rights, when in fact they were working against them!!!! If you happen to be a born and bred Democrat, you probably hail from one of the parts of the country where early labor movement efforts were focused.. in the western US, this is mainly in mining areas. But I find that Democrats tend to be blindly loyal. You cannot talk to them. A recent acquaintance of mine put it very well. He said that most of the "liberals" (Democrats) tend to focus on very small areas of interest, without seeing the whole picture, and lack in critical thinking skills. I think that's the way it is. For example, an animal rights activist might see the "cruelties" of domestic life and captivity for animals, while ignoring the fact that these animals would not even have a chance at life, if not for their captive role, or that animals in the wild state often suffer horribly, in ways never seen in captivity. I think that if everyone took the matter of their own life seriously, and bothered themselves to go on real fact-finding missions (gathering as much information "pro" as "con", and without bias, and then engaged in some intra-personal debates of their own (critical thinking), that everyone would tend to come to the right decision. Unfortunately, it's not that easy. Most people draw their information and opinions heavily from others, apparently in an interest to fit into the culture they gravitate to. You cannot talk to anyone in the entertainment industry about your own personal insights, if they do not agree. This is a sure career killer. But, who controls the entertainment industry, and the educational empire in the US? The Democrats. They can kill your career and ambitions in a hurry. You dare not disagree with them, or they will show you how very disagreeable they can be.. and absolutely unforgiving. Which is what I find so disturbing about their culture... It tells people that they are free to act up and speak out, but apparently only in a way that is useful to them. If it is not useful to them, they couldn't care less! Dorothy, go and peek behind the curtain and you will learn who the Great Oz really is!! --- On Fri, 9/25/09, Thomas Kirby <slowswimmer1@ yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Thomas Kirby <slowswimmer1@ yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new fish vs farmer
To: dog_anti-rescue_ anti-peta_ new@yahoogroups. com
Date: Friday, September 25, 2009, 5:29 AM | My head has exploded several times and I think I've had brain cancer at least once from these news tidbits. This one throws me at a loss for a good negative response. It can really only be characterized as murder of human beings for the sake of some stupid fish. How could the Demoncratic party do this to anyone? They've never been like that before. Know your rights. They don't. My blog: www.animalculture. org--- On Fri, 9/25/09, Capri <SophieCapri@ shaw.ca> wrote: Yes, as far as I know, you can. I've puked several times over things myself. Capri |
|
|
|
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home