Democratic Party
David Limbaugh’s new book, Bankrupt: The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today’s Democratic Party, is a must-read for liberals and conservatives alike.
Democrats need to wake up and realize how bankrupt their party has become.
It is the party of secular humanism, promoting moral relativism while mocking traditional moral values and attacking the religious right. It is the party of socialism, promoting class envy while spurning free enterprise and capitalism. It is the party of the ACLU, promoting judicial activism while opposing the literal interpretation of the Constitution.
Democrats, your party is bankrupt! It is weak on defense and national security. The reason is simple: The Democratic Party is run by the very same folks who staged anti-American rallies in the ’60s and ’70s. It’s so far left that conservatives are called “extreme right.”
Richard D. Swift
Bloomfield, Mo.
Why do I get the feeling that this guy could not define secular humanism or moral relativism on a multiple choice quiz? And I am really sick of jackasses with no idea what Socialism is throwing the term around like they understand it when they haven't a fucking clue.
What'll you bet he got his talking points from a pamphlet he picked up at church and doesn't know what they mean, let alone have a deep understanding of the concepts? (And no, I am not mocking religion - I am mocking willfull ignorance.)
Seeing as how I am sick to death of ignorance, I am going to shine some light in a couple of dark corners, starting with the misconceptions about Secular Humanism. Secular Humanism is not some scary, evil darkly satanistic pseudo religion that performs abortions on church altars. Secular Humanism is, however, a philosophy that elevates reason, ethics and justice as governing prinicples of individuals and society, while rejecting rites and rituals. Put that way it doesn't sound nearly so scary, now does it? I guess we can assume that those who embrace rite and ritual and reject humanist philosophy are against ethics, reason and justice?
Moral relativism is another buzz-term that illustrates the hypocricy of the right. Moral relativism hinges on "all truth is relative to the situation." Let me give you an example of this. Killing is forbidden. Therefore abortion should be illegal. But then, killing is okay if we are talking about the death penalty. Or pre-emptive unjustified and illegal war. Then it's okay. Then killing is good. That is the biggest moral relativism paradox I can think of. It's a big honkin' zit on the nose of the right wing and they can't see it.
Socialism sure is gaining popularity as a talking point these days. Maybe we should define it if we are going to throw it around, because folks, when you misuse it you look like chumps. Socialism means the community at large controls the means of production. That is it. I don't see a big push for this in the Democratic platform, but hey, I'm game. Does anyone realize that by this definition, the most socialist organization in America is the Green Bay Packers. The citizens of Green Bay own the team. Now socialism doesn't seem so dark and scary either, does it?
How 'bout that class envy, spurning free enterprise and capitalism rant? Perhaps Mr. Swift has heard of a man named Bill Gates and a little company called MicroSoft? Or a fella by the name of Phil Knight and another little company called Nike? Both are politically left, rich as hell and generous to a fault. They fund charities and community action and basically put their money where their values are. Mr. Swift, you look like an idiot to the truly informed. Sit down, shut up and stop embarassing yourself.
I fail to see how I "mock traditional moral values" just because I don't go around telling other people how to live. I fail to see how an organization that fights for the preservation of civil liberties for all Americans is so terrible. What has the ACLU ever done to you? As for promoting judicial activism - that all depends on whose ox is getting gored and we all know it. Conservative "judicial activism" is fine and dandy, practiced by good upright Americans. But overturn a restrictive abortion law or a concealed carry initiative on constitutional grounds and the howls of "Judicial Activism" rise to crescendo in 3.5 seconds.
I am a huge fan of the Constitution. All of it. Every last word, including the Second Ammendment. It literally says we can't suspend Habeas Corpus if we are not facing threats to the government at home or invasion on our soil. Want to think about that one? I bet you back the preznit on his torture and detainment policies, so I just put the lie to your hypocricy, Richard D. Swift. By the way, if we are to preserve the sanctity of the constitution it must be interpreted to the times if is to remain relevant. How would a literal reading work in determining a telecommunications issue? Just curious.
"Democrats, your party is bankrupt! It is weak on defense and national security. The reason is simple: The Democratic Party is run by the very same folks who staged anti-American rallies in the ’60s and ’70s. It’s so far left that conservatives are called “extreme right.”
Yeah, it was our party that covered for a sexual predator for six years. Our bad.
Weak on defense and national security? The attacks of September 11 was on your boys watch; and he was briefed, Condi was briefed and Ashcroft was briefed. Ashcroft stopped flying commercial two months before the attacks, after learning terrorists might use planes as weapons of mass destruction. Bush ignored the warnings and discounted the threat. How the fuck can you say we are soft on terror? Because we don't think the president should be able to skirt the law, abrogate the Constitution and spy on Americans? Your boy started a war that should have never been started and now terrorism is fueled by that act, not quelled. How about all those Iraq and Afghanistan vets running for office? By a ten-to-one margin, they are running as Democrats. Soft on defense my ass. How 'bout that Jim Talent? Sits on the Armed Services Committee, and doesn't show up for the meetings? In a time of war, no less? Doesn't get much more flacid about defense than that.
Those anti-american rallies were anti war demonstrations, and they were protected by that very Constitution you want a literal reading of - if you read it literally.
You are soft on the Constitution, Mr. Swift, besides being soft in the head.
Every political scientist of repute agrees that the American people have moved to the right over the past thirty years - this includes the Democratic party - the party that now embodies sober fiscal policy and sound economic practice, while the Publicans spend Chinese backed credit like drunken sailors.
Unfortunately the right has also moved to the right, to the point where people like Mr. Swift have become a parody of themselves; mocked not by the left, but by the powerful Republican elites who do not share their values, but use them to win elections - then ignore them after the votes are tallied, and mock and deride the very people who put them in office. (See Tempting Faith by David Kuo.)
Talk about a party of moral bankruptcy and I think of the modern GOP - the Grand Oil Party, the Groping Old Perverts - whatever you want to call 'em - the Publicans sold their moral code for thirty peices of silver and a political majority.
Ladies and Gentlemen: Richard D. Swift - your Idiot of the Day, and the leading candidate for Willfully Ignorant Jackass of the Month.
