What measure success?
Let’s ponder this.
If (sorry, but we must begin with a supposition in order to move this argument forward)…if I wish to sail across the deep blue sea, I need a boat.
Now, a boat takes many forms.
I could tie some coconuts together and hoist my hairy ass across the bulbous “stern” and cast adrift (hardly sailing, would you not agree? I know my prostate and dear Aunt Peg surely would).
Or, I could get a cigarette boat.
Great at the onset, but then once I run through the first, or second tank of gas (if I forgo hauling food in lieu of fuel), then I’m basically on a floating log.
Now, with some advanced planning (or the capital to invest in, oh, let’s just go for broke and say a Cutter), then I can sail across the sea in a proper sailing vessel.
Granted, it is not the QEII, but hey, my objective was to sail across the deep, blue sea (I did not specify that it required me to be comfortable).
So, success, in this example I suppose, is measured by what was originally intended.
Now, this begs a question in my mind (but we will get to that later).
Let’s have another example.
Let’s say, for giggles, that science has embarked upon this brave, new journey.
They have decided that they wish to “lick” in-grown toe-nails.
Science, because it has an infinite pool of resources not-at-all contingent on capital reinvestment or profit motive (I mean, when have you ever met a scientist who operated on private funding?)…because it has a sort of free reign to do all the leg work it wishes, it does not have to settle for a mere Cutty Sark, or other, sleek cutter, hell, they can do all the research, advanced planning, and by-god, just “book” the QEII.
So, in order to “lick” this affliction (ghad, perhaps they should try licking what “causes” the affliction); oh, but then, there is my point.
This IS what science does (does this definition work for you, Mr. President (now that we can, apparently, say that again since you have stepped out from behind the green curtain?).
It breaks a problem down, and seeks to find the causes of the problem.
One thing I’ve always been a little reticent about is — I think we should make sure, first, that it IS a problem (there is that word, again, Mr. President) before we embark on solving it…but I think we can all agree, in-grown toenails are a problem – unless you are some sort of ogre or ruffian or some such something.
So, science will put together all its resources, all its case studies, all its statistics from patient case studies and what they have derived from inducing in-grown toenails in the poor, defenseless population of millipede and then, low-and-behold, they discover the cause of in-grown toenails is– tada — improper-fitting footwear (you should have seen the nano-techies who etched those “iddy-biddy” shoes).
So, the whole society gets focused on proper footwear, and the incidence goes way, way down in all but the poor millipede, who has now developed a genetic predisposition for the affliction for some, strange reason (must have been the damned shoes).
Now, the point of this entire “charade” (you might ask?).
What, in the name of ALL that is holy, was the objective of the damned liberal?
All we have left, is to study the after-math (we can merely guess at the objectives).
Like the scientist, we have only to look at the afflictions, and then, try and determine the root causes of the afflictions (and first, of course, let’s be damned certain that it is a problem).
Now, Prince Charles and Miss Camilla, what do you suppose has led to the uprising you just faced? Why would a beloved populous turn on your asses like they have? Could it be because they feel about you about the same way my country feels about, oh, oh, Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, Reed, Schumer (man, I could write a bible here (ewwe)- let’s not just talk about the usual suspects, but all the “forefathers” who brought about their licentious and evil philosophy).
Well hell, why not?
Who did invent this damned liberalism in all its gorey?
Well, if you’ve been a devoted fan of The Precipice, you’ll know the answer to that one.
The term liberal was born in events surrounding Catholicism (but let’s not “blame” Catholics here; let’s just say “religion” rather than “Catholic” – since they are, for all intents and purposes, one-in-the-same).
It was born of religion and born through “religious” peoples (is there any, other “kind”?).
Moving away from the central focus of the core doctrine meant that someone had become “liberalized”. They were liberating themselves from the “shackles” of religion (sound familiar, Monsieur Atheist? You’ve completely cast what you define as shackles aside – you liking the fresh air now?).
Now, some of we religious people do not see religion as yoke (but of course, if you are a free-wheeling atheist who does not wish to be “encumbered” by religion, then you will, by default, wish to “liberalize” yourself from it); we see it as ultimate liberation from the “shackles” of this, paltry life, here below.
So, in point-of-fact, it was not really born of religion, or by “religious” peoples, but rather, from God-less atheists (who happen to be quite religious in their protestations (note the connotation of “protest” and “protesters” here) of all things Godly (and I DON’T just mean for you to “leap” at Protestants and protestations – rather, LEAP at PROTESTERS).
OK, enough of the point-less rambling.
There is a point (just as there IS a God (get it, Mr. President? – I AM, THAT I AM – no mystery, HE IS GOD, and not just ANY god, but THE GOD).
No man behind the curtain.
So, back to the point.
If I’m sailing that ship, and I’m in a damned big, all-fired hurry, then I’m hoping I don’t have to opt for the cocoNUT option, and can afford to charter a Cutty Sark to get myself sailing across the deep, blue sea, and damned quick.
If I have a long-term, nagging problem that requires a great deal of study to resolve, (and seeming endless resources of the kind one might-have-used-to find from the mythical, socialist money tree) then I can throw all I have at the problem and presumably (in time) solve it (even though in so doing I create an even bigger one for the millipede – well, thank the Atheist god for that one! Now the damned tree-huggers will have something to REALLY protest about).
So here is the crux of this whole piece.
What WAS (is?) the objective of the liberals?
What DO they wish to accomplish?
What ARE (were?) they trying to do?
What could they POSSIBLY be (have been) thinking?
Is this, as defined, actually “thinking” ?
I think NOT.
They (the general populous) are RIOTING in England. They are RISING UP against their future KING.
Have you studied history?
This same thing was happening a few weeks ago in other parts of Europe, in Spain, in Italy, in Ireland.
Ding, ding — the witch is DEAD.
COLLECTIVISM DOES NOT WORK!!! (Let go of it, Europeans – it is a sad state that you and yours have created).
They are tearing one another apart at the very seams because the god-less horde (look at their attendance numbers for church services) is having trouble coming to terms with their addiction.
The government is NOT your mommas and your daddies, Candyland does not exist outside the context of a game board, and socialism/communism/collectivism does not work.
Now, back on point again.
What was that whole “hope and change” thing really about?
Stay with me folks.
Literature (and not even modern literature) has been about shattering illusions (delusions? one-in-the-same?).
Godspell, Jesus Christ, Superstar, hell, even Edith and “AAAHcheee” were about dispelling myths!
The myth of the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-seeing American.
The myth that a bunch of dead, white guys might have had something right.
Are you trying to tell me that we actually rely on artists to define our morals for us? (I AM a writer; I think I can speak to this).
Well, look around.
Who are our heroes and heroines today?
Stay with me.
They are people who publish sex tapes online. OOOO – superstar! (porn star).
These stars we read about are some of the most disgusting people on earth (sorry Charlie).
These are our icons? These are who we look UP to?
So, in shattering America’s “delusions” about faith, and religion and so on, (for I am already accepting that this is what the liberals were trying to do)…in their vainglorious attempts to shatter our delusions, what HAVE they learned about their own?
Knock, knock liberal – here’s a 411 for ya – UTOPIA does not exist this side of EDEN (and — knock, knock — not EVEN a capitalist utopia).
It really doesn’t (God does, but it doesn’t).
Again, sorry Charlie.
Grow the HELL up.
Get the monkey off your back.
Stop believing in your perverted philosophies.
Back AWAY from the helm.
Your philosophies do not work.
Look at the world you have created with them.
It is falling apart around your very ears.
Now, let’s look at what DOES work.
We came to a continent Five HUNDRED years ago (we, quasi-, former-, proto-, Eurotrash); we formed it, and we formed it based on all the things we did not like about our former homes, and as well, based on all the former things we DID like about our former homes.
WE, were Italians (thanks, Vespucci); WE, were Spaniards (thanks St. Augustine, Hugenots, et. al.); WE, were Britainians (thanks, Eric the Red (why could you NOT have been Eric the ORANGE? huh? I’d have settled for Eric the Blue…was that too much to ask of your tree-worshiping momma? Was it?).
I don’t need to iterate OUR history here; we know it all too well.
I hate to quote Sir Michael Jackson here, but, why not? “We are the World“.
Welcome to philosophy, 101.
I counter, we are NOT the world (and, thank God Almighty).
Look at the world, and the shape it is in.
Yes, it was the Chinese and the Irish who built our railway system, and ushered us into the modern age.
It is our “Melting-Pot” mentality that has led us to believe we understand the world, and we simply do not.
But here is one thing that we DO understand…human nature (that’s one thing you do gain from floating in a stew of humanity)…and it does not matter whether you are in the jungles of South East Asia or the palaces of Abu Dubai – THAT does not change (we all have to eat, we all get sick, and we all have to survive, one way, or another).
So, since we have time here (obviously), let’s take a scientific approach to this “problem” (for I do perceive we have a problem “When Princes are Attacked” (sounds like a reality show)).
How did it happen?
Let’s unravel the mind-set of the radical underground mentality that was the Obama-minigeneration (or, “Ominjuns” for short) (in our next column…maybe – but DON’T hold your breath).
Thus endeth the lecture (for this round).
Happy living, all you God-fearing, peace-luvin’ Capitalists!!!
Now, where did I leave my ceegar?