Thursday, February 05, 2009

Antichrist vs. Antimarx

As I mentioned yesterday, the later Soloviev tempered his optimystic side with some more sober pessimysticism. While the cosmos would eventually be deified, it first had to make it through the gauntlet of various opposing forces in the world. But instead of "unifying," or "integrating," these forces, it would be as if these opposing forces would be dramatically heightened and finally "revealed in all their contradictoriness." As you may have noticed, this is something our Minister of Docrinal Enforcement often brings up, which means there's a good chance there's something to it.

I don't want to be like one of those guys who is constantly predicting the apocalypse, or second coming of Toots, or X-day, but one can't help thinking of the way things are going here in the United States.

For example, I can remember back, say, in the mid-1970's, when it seemed as if it was the end of ideological division, since everyone (at least everyone I knew) was pretty much on the same page except for maybe a few right wing religious kooks (who back then actually supported the "born again" Carter!) and National Review subscribers. Then, within just a few years, the left wing anti-antichrist appeared, Ronulus Maximus, which brought out an extraordinarily deep and essentially unbridgeable cultural divide that the left will never stop resenting.

Likewise, after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, it seemed for awhile as if we might even have reached the "end of history," in the sense that it was finally settled that history was inevitably moving in the slackward direction of individualism, liberal democracy, and free markets. Oops. Islamic supremacy and the resurgence of the lunatic left but the kibosh on that fantasy. Not to mention the Chinese hybrid model that combines free market capitalism with authoritarian control.

So now it seems that the world-historical outlines are more stark than ever. I have nothing whatsoever in common with a dailykos reader, Air America listener, or New York Times subscriber. Seriously, we might as well be a different species. Furthemore, I see no possibilty of reconciliation, because our first principles are completely and irrevocably at odds with theirs, and one doesn't compromise on first principles.

Which in turn is why the idea of Obama being "bipartisan" or a "uniter" is pure fantasy. Already, in just two weeks, we see that George Bush was far more of a uniter than Barry & crew. After all, did George Bush ever propose anything which every single Democrat voted against? Maybe he did, but I can't remember one. Despite all the hysteria, the war has remained bipartisan, in that congress has to keep appropriating the money. FISA passed easily, as did the Patriot Act. Rendition will continue, as will "torture," except now the press will call it "vigorous interrogation." Etc.

Blah blah blah. My only point is that the divisions in the country are as sharp as ever -- as sharp as the difference between the children of earth and the children of Light. Which Soloviev would probably say is the whole point, for "the ways of history do not lead directly upwards to the Kingdom of God," but "pass by way of the final unveiling of the Antichrist, who conceals himself under the last mask to be stripped away, the mask of what is good and what is Christian."

Now, as you know, my preference is always to "demythologize" -- or at least unsaturate -- these things and look for the deeper principles they instantiate. I'm not saying it is the correct way, but it may be the more effective way, because as soon as you mention "Antichrist," it's pretty much of a conversation killer. Most people will dismiss you out of hand, while the rest will assume you mean it in the way they do. In short, the word has become too saturated to serve as a basis for exploration and thought, at least in terms of communicating novel insights. Which is why I prefer abstract symbols such as O and Ø. As outlined in my book, O is to (¶) as Ø is to (•) -- or more likely, (•••), i.e., a person with either no center or multiple centers.

Looked at this way, evil is not just a "lack" or "absence." Ultimately it is that, but it nevertheless takes on an ontological weight here in Middle Earth, since it "metabolizes" people and ideas, and therefore seems to grow (which it does). And as it grows, its mass produces a "spiritual gravity" that continues to draw people into its circular obit, where they "die to heaven" -- the opposite movement of the spiritual person who "dies to the world." And once that happens, you have a "creature of the Antichrist," so to speak, or someone who has been "born again" from below.

You will have noticed that not only are these people different from us, but they draw nourishment from a different source, which ensures that the demon they harbor will continue to grow. Specifically, they draw their nourishment from "the world," plus several gradations below that. These gradations are not "real" -- i.e., they are not a true part of the cosmic hierarchy, but are analogous to "false angels," or what we might call "collective mind parasites." That monster that the Islamic supremacists worship is a fine example, but the left also has its lowerarchy of demon-angels that a normal person simply does not comprehend -- in particular, why they should be in any way respected, let alone enforced by the bullies of political correctness.

(Here, check out this bizarre but typical example of a leftwing religious service. Yes, it's hilarious, until you realize that this diabolical ideology has completely penetrated academia. Note that this is literally the death of education -- and therefore its sufficient reason, the search for Truth -- and its replacement with a parasitic double. It literally prevents the possibility of pure thought breaking through into Being, and actually turns thought into an infectious spiritual illness. Colleges become centers of disease incubation and propagation, like the bathhouses of San Francisco or Barney Frank's basement.)

This will only sound polemical to people who already have the disease. To the rest of you, it will sound quite matter-of-fact. Not only that, but I think you'll find that the left describes us in the identical way. Examples are far too numerous to mention, but one thinks of Bill Moyers referring to Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity as "political porn." Websites such as dailykos and huffpo are nothing more than unbound hatred given form by a fantasied projection of conservatism. And there is no need for a troll to leave a comment to the effect that I represent "unbound hatred given form by a fantasied projection of leftism," because we already know you feel that way. Let's just stipulate that only one of us can be correct.

One of the persistent metaphysical errors that assures the dysfunction of the left is the absurd elevation of matter to the ultimate ground of reality. Once this is done, then there is no way to adjudicate between competing ideas of reality, so it becomes easy to latch onto an abstract ideal, such as Marxism, and proceed to superimpose it on reality. In other words, the leftist lurches between bonehead materialism and hamhanded idealism in a completely incoherent way.

At risk of belaboring the pain, only Christianity gives birth to a (the) unity of idealism and materialism at a higher level, which is what the United States is supposed to be about in practice, what with the harmonious interplay of free markets operating within the boundary conditions of Judeo-Christian principles. Not surprisingly, the left attacks and undermines both, which can only result in decadence and dysfunction: the realm of Ø.

Furthermore, the doctrine of multiculturalism is a direct attack on the spiritual unity of Man, for man can only be unified on a spiritual level. Instead, the left wants to unify man on a material level, for example, by stealing from some people in order to give money away to people who don't even pay taxes, under the guise of "equality." But if equality is only material equality, it not only destroys the realm of spirit, but ensures tyranny: the tyranny of the takers over the makers and parasites over their hosts.

Oops. Out of time. See you tomorrow.

70 Comments:

Blogger julie said...

Maybe this is too tangential, but I don't know - it seems apropos. Anyway, here's a comment I left at Ricky's yesterday (which probably only he saw), along with his response:

"This is a bit (or rather, a lot) of a tangent, but apropos the Law I was just reading a blog post I stumbled across here, and this sentence jumped out at me:

"We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."
(uttered by a British police officer, regarding firearms and self-defense)

What's striking about that, to me, anyway, is when you look at it through the mask of the raccoon, it is imperative that we must take the Law into our own hands - and hearts and souls. Relinquishing Authority to any mere mortal is grounds for Dismissal, in the worst possible way..."

To which Ricky replied:

Julie, yes:

"Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God, the LORD is one. Love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength. These commandments that I give you today are to be upon your hearts. Impress them on your children. Talk about them when you sit at home and when you walk along the road, when you lie down and when you get up. Tie them as symbols on your hands and bind them on your foreheads. Write them on the doorframes of your houses and on your gates."
Deuteronomy 6
~
"The glorification of the day [Sabbath], the insistence upon strict observance, did not, however, lead the rabbis to a deification of the law. ‘The Sabbath is given unto you, not you unto the Sabbath.’ The ancient rabbis knew that excessive piety may endanger the fulfillment of the essence of the law. ‘There is nothing more important, according to the Torah, than to preserve human life…Even when there is the slightest possibility that a life may be at stake one may disregard every prohibition of the law.’ One must sacrifice mitzvot for the sake of man rather than sacrifice man ‘for the sake of mitzvot.’ The purpose of the Torah is ‘to bring life to Israel, in this world and in the world to come.’”
Abraham Joshua Heschel, The Sabbath
~
"[a] strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means."
Thomas Jefferson - justifying his action for signing the treaty allowing the purchase of the Louisiana territory by the Federal Government, in conflict with his belief that the Constitution did not bestow the Government that right.


What's that got to do with today's post?

Furthermore, the doctrine of multiculturalism is a direct attack on the spiritual unity of Man, for man can only be unified on a spiritual level. Instead, the left wants to unify man on a material level, for example, by stealing from some people in order to give money away to people who don't even pay taxes, under the guise of "equality." But if equality is only material equality, it not only destroys the realm of spirit, but ensures tyranny.

The raccoons would see responsibility for the Law (and the law) where it belongs - in the hands of everyman, as given from Above. The left insists that Everyman isn't responsible enough to be trusted with the law (and there isn't really a Law, anyway), and so would wrest that responsibility and place it into the hands of a select few, "for our own good." And if we go along with that, uncertainty will be removed as we walk right into that circular obit.

(Once again, it feels like my comment is clear as mud, but maybe someone else can make sense of it...)

2/05/2009 08:56:00 AM  
Anonymous hopenchange said...

"Which in turn is why the idea of Obama being "bipartisan" or a "uniter" is pure fantasy."

Comrade, get with the program.

2/05/2009 09:12:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Yes, the loss of religion inevitably leads to an increase in law, i.e., external control to replace the inner moral harmony that comes about with spiritual ascent. In turn, the laws provoke an opposite reaction, as people instinctively rebel and try to get around them in order to be "free." But then it is a lawless freedom with no spiritual telos, and here we are. The people who steal from us through taxes are the first ones to rebel --. e.g., Daschle, Geithner, Rangle, Franken, et al.

2/05/2009 09:14:00 AM  
Blogger NoMo said...

"...except for maybe a few right wing religious kooks (who back then actually supported the "born again" Carter!)..."

Ahem. (Hey, I was way "smarter" then than I an today.) Carter - now there's a disappointment.

Mmmmmmm...reolies(wv)

2/05/2009 09:18:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

"Here, check out this bizarre but typical example of a leftwing religious service. Yes, it's hilarious, until you realize that this diabolical ideology has completely penetrated academia. Note that this is literally the death of education -- and therefore its sufficient reason, the search for Truth -- and its replacement with a parasitic opposite."

Particularly telling, are the services for "Are Barack Obama and Tiger Woods Black?" or "What is Right Could be Wrong: A Discussion of How Ideology Creates Structured Privilege" with it's description: "This workshop relates the experience of a particular oppressed group and concretely illustrates how power and privilege for the dominate group is structured into our society. We will then speak to what would have to be done in order to end unearned privilege in our society."

These describe the particularization and disintegration of even the possibility of Education (Sorry to hear about the Fulbright plan to spread the darkness), which the Underground Grammarian exposed and flayed so well beginning 30+ years ago... but the mud rolls on. The only way to escape the '...tentacular will be to abandon the "seemingly endless tentacular complexities..." of public dis-education, will be to abandon it to its own dark pursuits. I had another bout with one of the hydra's heads last night... it is not possible to reform or improve it, private and homeschoolers are the only possible avenues for creating those who will be capable of understanding "what the United States is supposed to be about in practice", but of course as soon as they gain momentum, you'll see the "power and privilege for the dominate group " tighten it's coils... argh.

2/05/2009 09:36:00 AM  
Blogger [...] said...

The irony is that 'you' create 'them'. The silliness of both 'the left' and 'the right' creates and reinforces the other.

As the Tao Te Ching says

'Evil, opposed by nothing, dissolves on its own'

2/05/2009 09:53:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

The deeper irony is that "you" create a "me," albeit in fantasy.

2/05/2009 09:55:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Apt moniker, though.

2/05/2009 09:55:00 AM  
Blogger NoMo said...

Where spiritual meets political.

"...the leftist lurches between bonehead materialism and hamhanded idealism in a completely incoherent way."

Isn't there a medical term for this disorder?

"...the doctrine of multiculturalism is a direct attack on the spiritual unity of Man, for man can only be unified on a spiritual level."

For instance (not to belabor the point): “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.”(1 Cor 12:13) “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”(Gal 3:28).
“…a renewal in which there is no distinction between Greek and Jew, circumcised and uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave and freeman, but Christ is all, and in all.”(Col 3:11)

Now THAT'S radical!

Particularly great post today. Thanks, Bob.

2/05/2009 09:56:00 AM  
Anonymous word veri said...

I love these xwingers who keep coming back to complain about raccoons opposing anything...

...by proclaiming their opposition.

If evil, opposed by nothing, dissolves on its own, and Bob's opposition to Leftism is silly and (by implication) evil, why in the world would you voice your own opposition to bob's viewpoint, except to demonstrate that you are also either silly or evil?

That's a lovely clown hat you're wearing.

2/05/2009 10:05:00 AM  
Blogger mushroom said...

I'm a little skittish about the whole end-of-time thing as well. The Israelites in the Book of Judges kept cycling through apathy, apostasy, oppression, repentance, restoration.

But, there were elements of Israel that got progressively worse through those cycles, and elements that were refined and got better, ultimately resulting in the elevation of David to the throne and the establishment of the line that led to the Messiah. It doesn't just cycle, it spirals.

2/05/2009 10:17:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

Julie and Ricky, as the deuteronimist understood, the Law in its principles, must be written into the head, heart, soul and surroundings of the people, for it to live in their society. Mere enforcement of rules can and will lead to nothing more than more enforcers forcing the rules necessary to Force them to be free".

Merely having the Laws written, as with our constitution, will not preserve it, if the people cease to live and breathe the ideas which those words express. We have almost reached the point where our constitution has been reduced to words only, words which are described as being outdated by those charged with teaching them; those words which have not been changed, but with their meaning being lost, they no longer rule in the land.

We had a Supreme Court Justice in the early 20th century, McReynolds (no peach of a person, but that's beside the point), who received an Education in a previous age, and who still saw the purpose of the constitution as being a document which "strictly limited the federal government to the powers enumerated in the U.S. Constitution.". In a case dealing with an aspect of FDR's gold heist (FDR also, btw, sought to 'cap executives pay'), he made a "... noteworthy dissent in the Gold Clause cases in 1935, which marked the end of the gold standard for American currency, McReynolds remarked that the Constitution as he knew it was "gone.""... well... if not gone, certainly on life support.

If the Law, if Justice are not understood and held dear in the hearts and minds of the people, which itself cannot be done by a people who do not hold morality even higher, then no rules or regulations will be able to maintain 'law and order', and no amount of enforcers will change that. No politician or elections will do that either, they can only speed or slow the losses. As the proregressives and marxists have always known, the real battle is in the classroom. If we gain ground there, we will lose it all everywhere else.

Sorry to be such a pessimysticist.

2/05/2009 10:21:00 AM  
Anonymous jwm said...

A notion came to me recently. The un-makers are loose in the world.
What is rap, but music un-made? Divorced from harmony, and melody, it is rage with a drumbeat. It can elevate no one. What is graffitti, but art un-made? Utterly divorced from beauty, and form. Worse, just as boom car rap unmakes any hope of thought within hearing distance, so taggers unmake the simple functional beauty of a block wall or a building, or even a culvert (for those of you in So. Cal). And to press the point, there is a plain, and simple beauty in block walls, and culverts. Its is the beauty, or nobility, if you will, of plain form married to prefect funtion- unmade in an instant by an asshole with a spray can. And to riff on one of my familiar rants, what is tattooing, but grafitti applied to unmake the most beautiful element in The Creation, the human. I see where the trend has now metastisized into elevating scarrification, and outright mutilation of the body. And in an almost perfect inversion of truth, it is called "body art"
Liberty is unmade into license for behavior that would embarrass a farm animal, while people celebrate being freed by the law from second hand smoke, and riding without helmets. Science has been unmade into advocacy for the false religion of earth-worship.
And America? like the 0 said, "I won."

JWM

2/05/2009 10:22:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

ehAhem "If we gain ground there, we will lose it all everywhere else."

"If we don't gain ground there, we will lose it all everywhere else.

2/05/2009 10:29:00 AM  
Blogger Van said...

JWM said "The un-makers are loose in the world."

Yep. Came to Hume to, as he unleashed it,
"The mind has never anything present to it but the perceptions, and cannot possibly reach any experience of their connexion with objects. The supposition of such a connexion is, therefore, without any foundation in reasoning.”,

nothing but unmaking can, could, or did, or will follow from it.

2/05/2009 10:43:00 AM  
Anonymous [...] said...

Once there was a man who had a rat. He said, "Oh. I have a rat!I must obey the Tao of rats and feed it to my ox". But the wise ox refused to eat the rat. The wise ox said to the man, "Feed this rat to some other ox." The man understood, and was at that moment enlightened.

2/05/2009 10:50:00 AM  
Anonymous slim pickens said...

Tried to feed a rat to an ox without even renderin' it down ... Must a'been one dumb son-of-ellipse ...

2/05/2009 11:09:00 AM  
Anonymous *snork* said...

Yeah, cuz the first thing I think about when I have rat is how to cram it down the throat of the nearest herbivore...

2/05/2009 12:38:00 PM  
Blogger [...] said...

it was said:

I love these xwingers who keep coming back to complain about raccoons opposing anything...

...by proclaiming their opposition.

If evil, opposed by nothing, dissolves on its own, and Bob's opposition to Leftism is silly and (by implication) evil, why in the world would you voice your own opposition to bob's viewpoint, except to demonstrate that you are also either silly or evil?


Several things. First, I'm sorry you fail to understand the difference between pointing out error and being in opposition. To point out an error in hope that it will be seen and corrected assumes the 'other' is not in fact an other but is fundamentally similar and can, just as you do, come to understand. Opposition assumes that the 'other' is genuinely other and is not just in error, but IS error, by their nature. It is the Manichean error.

Second, I certainly never asserted nor implied that Bob was evil[that would be quite an outlandish claim], but he is very often quite silly. The two are quite distinct.

Also, to the other person using my handle, lets not be passive aggressive. It is childish. If you have a point, state it plainly.

Oh yes, Bob, its quite absurd to suggest that 'I' create 'you'[even in fantasy] since I have nothing to do with your compulsive blogging nor your tendency for opposition. That is caused by your narcissism and your confused attempt to know the non-rational via the rational.

As Krishnamurti put it, Truth is a pathless land.

And as Eckhart said, For whoever seeks God with some particular method will gain the method and lose God, who is forever hidden from such seeking.

2/05/2009 01:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am a troll undergoing reformation. Through contact with the blog I have had the blinders removed regarding the left.

I have reembraced Christianity.

I agree with the stance of attacking and resisting anti-religious forces.

One puzzement remains, and that is the dichotomy Bob delineates in this post. I can't really see it.

Remove language from the equation; put Olberman and Godwin under study; examine their diets, spending habits, patterns of activity, relationship dynamics, sex life, etc.

Where can a real difference be delineated? Is this conflict all about language and fought in an abstract space? Or is there any material bearing here?

2/05/2009 01:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well starters, I'm pretty sure Olberman is gay.

2/05/2009 02:13:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

"Remove language from the equation; put Olberman and Godwin under study; examine their diets, spending habits, patterns of activity, relationship dynamics, sex life, etc.

Where can a real difference be delineated?"

Bwaaahahah...

*ahem*

Olberman?

I caught a glimpse of him on Sunday. He looked constipated. And at a guess (as I know very little about Olberman's modus vivendi, though I could hazard a few guesses), it's probably safe to say that his lifestyle is rather drastically different than Bob's.

If you're asking whether Bob lives what he speaks, why don't you just ask him? Goodness knows, he's open enough about it.

2/05/2009 02:22:00 PM  
Anonymous will said...

>> . . . these opposing forces would be dramatically heightened . . . <<

I should say. My one-eyed blog and cable news scans (eye-surgery, you know) reveal that the word "secession" keeps popping up here and there. It's percolating under the surface for now . . . but just wait.

As Within, So Without Department - the clash of opposing forces should be manifesting within at this time in some manner or another, which I think would be fairly obvious if one has a grain of spiritual discernment. Personal events, relationships, even thoughts, meditations, etc. should be highlighting the stark difference between the karma-laden past and what could be a transcendent future. This is going to be different for everyone of course, but the dynamic is the same across the board.

This, I believe, is one of those precious windows of spiritual opportunity whereby we can really take a quantum leap upward. One way or the other, we can't remain on the fence.

2/05/2009 02:26:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

eLisp said "As the Tao Te Ching says
'Evil, opposed by nothing, dissolves on its own'"

Allow me to be aggressively aggressive; he who expects evil to dissolve on its own, is an idiot.

He who repeats such snippets out of context in an attempt to sound wise, has a fool for his goorue.

2/05/2009 02:33:00 PM  
Anonymous will said...

Hmm . . . I now have one good eye and one bad eye.

There ya go. There's your symbolic opposition of forces manifested on my face.

2/05/2009 02:36:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

Yikes, Will - that's a little too literal!

I hope your bad eye gets better soon.

2/05/2009 02:43:00 PM  
Anonymous bob f. said...

There was a back and forth a couple of days ago concerning how fewer people attend to the site when the subject is religion and only religion.
I suspect that it is more a matter of people (like me) having difficulty relating the abstract principles discussed to what is going on in the world (or maybe just understanding them; I can't claim any particular insight from reading Schuon, for example, which I know is my own lack, similar to some people not being able to "get" classical music.)
By contrast, when B'ob discusses the world at large in terms of those principles readers respond much more readily, or maybe just more.
So maybe the lesson is when you discuss "as above", remember to link it to "as below".
*break* *break*
As to today's post, the Constitution and education were mentioned. I spent some time years ago "sitting Zen" with the Constitution in order to free that little beauty from 200 years of nasty old Supreme Court varnish. By the way, law school does not teach what the Constitution says, but what the Supreme Court says the Constitution says.
Anyway, what we have from this consitutional wu wei is a First Amendment right to school vouchers based on the two prongs of the Amendment's religious freedom clause. If any family believes that religion is an important aspect of their children's education, the state cannot interfere with that, and since the state cannot provide religious education it must provide vouchers for all families that desire a religious education for their children. (This would also apply to home-schoolers. Bob?)
But wait; there's more!
Since the state cannot treat citizens differently based on religion, if it must provide vouchers for families desiring education with religious content, the state must also provide vouchers to all families.
Pretty neat, eh?
Think there's any chance Sarah Palin reads this blog?

2/05/2009 02:43:00 PM  
Blogger jwm said...

OK, How's this?
First, I'll apologize to braketdotdotdotbracket guy for doing the nick-jack. That was me. It was beneath even my marginal standards for behavior on-line. Not only that it's low-bred and chickenshit; not passive aggressive. But that's what happens if I don't oppose those evil- nah, that doesn't quite rise to the level of evil- impulses.
But I don't appologize for the mockery. Van just said what I was going to say next, so I'll leave it at that.

JWM

2/05/2009 02:44:00 PM  
Blogger Van said...

Will, don't do anything! Leave the bad eye alone, and it'll dissolve.

Problem solved.

2/05/2009 02:45:00 PM  
Anonymous will said...

I closed both eyes and a third opened.

- Rumi paraphrase

And if there is even one remark about being "Rumi-eyed" ...

2/05/2009 03:19:00 PM  
Blogger [...] said...

Don't confuse avoiding opposition with doing nothing.

When there is error, point it out, shine the light of truth on it. This is a far cry from opposition.

2/05/2009 03:23:00 PM  
Blogger [...] said...

I would have thought the days of Taoist sentiments being mistaken for passivity had passed.

2/05/2009 03:26:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob is certainly a silly man who thinks pretty highly of himself, and his conservative ideals.

If he, just like any other conservative out there, spent as much time trying to come up with good ideas as he did trying to get his bash on liberals, we'd probably have the next Jesus right here. It's just absurd reading his crap sometimes.

Why didn't a single Republican vote on Obama's legislation? I don't know, why didn't they compromise on a single bit of it? It was basically their way or the highway, and instead of choosing to come up with ideas for a compromise, they decided not to vote at all. Now you tell me the minority should get its own way completely when they lost the election. Quite frankly, they're babies. They're the reason bipartisan politics won't work, they don't compromise, they obstruct. If you think they're looking out for the best interests of our nation, why haven't they proposed any ideas themselves?

They're letting the dems do the thinking, and they throw the tantrums, not because they care about America, but because they care about reelection. And if they keep it up they might actually have a tough time winning an easy 2010 election.

It's just ridiculous that they refuse to put anything on the table because they're in the backseat and they don't like it. Instead of offering anything, they're trying their hardest to make the Dems look irresponsible. If Republicans actually offered their own original solution, instead of the usual talking points, I could take somebody seriously if they said Obama is actually the problem. Sorry, he's the one who's at least offering something.

2/05/2009 05:16:00 PM  
Blogger julie said...

And now, something completely different for all the Conservative Ladies out there; a little somethin' to get you in the mood for Valentine's Day.

2/05/2009 05:31:00 PM  
Blogger walt said...

Nitpicking:

confusing claptrap
tax-cut monomania
yahoos/cranks R Us

2/05/2009 05:54:00 PM  
Anonymous Alan said...

Anon 5:16 -

Where DO you get your facts?

Some corrections:
1. They did vote - just that they voted against it.
2. They have put proposals on the table and set out pretty clear principles they have been arguing for.
3. They have been shut out of any deliberation both in the house and the Senate.

Ignorance is no excuse for ignorance.

******

re: "The raccoons would see responsibility for the Law (and the law) where it belongs - in the hands of everyman, as given from Above."

And this is confused by language tricks by changing the word "Theocracy" to mean what "Clerocracy" means (ie. instead of rule by God, rule by the priesthood). The left can only understand rule by the priesthood and therefore confuse the two.

Awesome post and comments today.

2/05/2009 06:28:00 PM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Julie, Van,
RE the Law, in Exodus, Moses breaks the tablets without affecting the Law. The Lord instructs Moses to make another pair of tablets and He writes on these, as I understand it, in every way the same as the first pair. In effect, different words, same essence.

2/05/2009 06:40:00 PM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

In other words, you can break ‘em, but you can’t make a dent.

2/05/2009 06:44:00 PM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Anon, there are some things on which you should never shoot for compromise, such as your life if someone wants to make you a slave. Half a life in slavery is some compromise. Bob covered this today. They’re not negotiating the color of the drapes. I’m all for obstruction if that’s all there is between you and my property.

2/05/2009 06:52:00 PM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Babbleanon:
Nobody has to try to make the Dems look irresponsible. They do that quite well on their own.

So you're nervous the House Pubs refused to give Teh Grand Poobaa cover for the Porkulus?

Any sucker RINO who votes for that POS is toast next time they run & they know it. Time to clean house.

2/05/2009 06:55:00 PM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Heh.. They'll never take us alive. Except maybe for Ben, if they try using grog for bait.

2/05/2009 07:06:00 PM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

"The idea of raccoons on the White House grounds give us great pause,"

Hee hee, he spelt paws wrong.

2/05/2009 07:13:00 PM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

“The traps are baited with apples, cat food and peanut butter, Burton said, but so far to little avail.”

Bob?




They got me.

2/05/2009 07:18:00 PM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

We hates you filthy Bagginses.

2/05/2009 07:21:00 PM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

"Raccoons use the city's storm drain system like their personal Metro, an underground world that allows them an efficient, citywide route of attack on garbage cans, he said."

"President Calvin Coolidge had a pet raccoon, Rebecca, who often sat on his shoulder or was cuddled by the first lady. Rebecca terrorized the staff, however."

YYYES!!

2/05/2009 08:01:00 PM  
Anonymous jwm said...

'Evil, opposed by nothing, dissolves on its own'

As Van pointed out, this statement is demonstrably false.

you fail to understand the difference between pointing out error and being in opposition.

So pointing out error is not opposing. Not opposing= opposed by nothing.

And the first statement is still demonstrably false.

Don't confuse avoiding opposition with doing nothing.

This still leaves the evil unopposed. And it still leaves the first statement demonstrably false.

You would suggest then, that pointing out error, in the way, perhaps of gentle remonstrace is the best way to deal with evil. That is pacifist nonsense.

I would have thought the days of Taoist sentiments being mistaken for passivity had passed.

Now That is passive aggressive.

Try: "Resist not evil", instead.
This is a statement in the imperative. It speaks to the individual. Now, the individual has to ask, "What did He mean by that?" I'm not wise enough to parse it out unless I consider the opposite of the statement, which would be "resist evil". That statement opens the door for a world of misbehavior, especially if it's someone else's evil.

'Evil opposed by nothing dissolves on its own.' That statement is an assertion. It is the premise for an argument that must be proved or disproved.

And, as Van pointed out, it is demostrably false.

JWM

2/05/2009 08:15:00 PM  
Anonymous Cousin Dupree said...

There's an obvious reason why indigenous Taoists live under tyranny.

2/05/2009 08:20:00 PM  
Anonymous Aquila said...

White House Raccoons? What about the White House Possum?

2/05/2009 09:01:00 PM  
Anonymous Gen. Fuzzbotham said...

Mwuahaaha
Even now, the raccoon brigade is infiltrating the White House.
Our spies are everywhere, and for every one they find, there are probably twenty more in hiding...

2/05/2009 09:55:00 PM  
Blogger [...] said...

It was written:

There's an obvious reason why indigenous Taoists live under tyranny.

Be careful of writing about things you clearly know nothing about.

If you think Chinese political history in general, and the role of the very multifaceted tradition of Taoist thought within it specifically, is simple you are willfully ignorant, more so than I thought possible.

I will try to pretend you didn't make such a foolish statement.

2/05/2009 10:19:00 PM  
Anonymous Cousin Dupree said...

I'll double down: there's an equally obvious reason why the freest Taoists in the world live in a Judeo-Christian culture where we oppose evil.

2/06/2009 05:22:00 AM  
Blogger Gagdad Bob said...

Good insultainment: a methodical takedown of Queeg, who is in way over his head.

2/06/2009 05:35:00 AM  
Anonymous maineman said...

You know, Mr. Dot Dot Dot, it sounds to me like you could benefit from reading the discussion in MOTT on spiritual arrogance.

Not that we couldn't all stand to revisit that from time to time.

2/06/2009 05:44:00 AM  
Anonymous maineman said...

And, at the risk of waxing a tad more oppositional, I might suggest that you can find a clear illustration of the complete and utter stupidity of your stance right HERE.

2/06/2009 06:07:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 5:16 -

Where DO you get your facts?

Some corrections:
"1. They did vote - just that they voted against it.
2. They have put proposals on the table and set out pretty clear principles they have been arguing for.
3. They have been shut out of any deliberation both in the house and the Senate.

Ignorance is no excuse for ignorance."

Excuse me, I know they did vote against it. My apologies, I meant to say "for it." That wasn't ignorance, just poor word choice. Secondly, they didn't provide any proposals, unless you count cutting stuff that goes against your party ideals a proposal--unfortunately they didn't fill it with any good or original ideas, just the same old party talking points. Also, they have not been shut out, they absolutely refuse to work with democrats. They shut themselves out, unless you consider Obama inviting them to the White House being shut out.

And all that aside, don't you believe the Republicans have shown they're the party that refuses to work with the other side? Had the Democrats actually shut them out of deliberation(which makes you wonder why you see all these Republicans who are managing to voice their opinions all over the "liberal" media) the Republicans still would not work with them based on their childish partisanship. So I don't think it matters that Democrats shut them out or not, Republicans won't work with them anyway, and so ultimately trying to claim it as if it's the Democrat's fault the Republicans aren't getting anything done, well, lets not be to quick to defend the party that ran this country into the ground, or in the least did nothing as it watched it fall.

2/06/2009 07:08:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

I don't know whether to laugh or cry when the big O goes off the teleprompter.

2/06/2009 07:30:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If you're republican, probably cry. He did a good job at embarrassing republicans for their hypocrisy, their indecisiveness, and their partisan motives for doing so. If you think that was embarrassing for Obama for exposing his own partisan ways, what he said was even more embarrassing for republicans, mostly because a majority see it that way. Obama did try to reach out to republicans, and all they did was piss and moan and tried to act like they were the victims.

2/06/2009 07:41:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Anon 7:08,
You said “good or original ideas”. I choose plain old “good”, thanks.
I have to say, that’s what bugs me about libs especially, and Repubs occasionally. That somehow we just need change or new. Let’s get the “good” down first, ok?
RE politics and hope and change and today’s fashion and such, let’s try this barely used tradition: leave me alone for a change.

2/06/2009 07:45:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Hey, Ricky - wv has a message for you:
Remisonq

2/06/2009 07:51:00 AM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Anon 7:08
Do attempt to get at least your starting premiss correct: the Porkulus is Queen Nancy's baby, written behind closed doors by her team, excluding both Dems and Pubs in the writing process. Teh One has already said several times 'ah, um, er, I didn't realize that particular item was in this Bill, but we've got to pass it right now!!!!!'

Teh First Doofus hasn't even read that bloated sucker & actually keeps saying so.

2/06/2009 08:32:00 AM  
Blogger julie said...

Ximeze, according to the article, he also says: "...his “greatest partner,” Pelosi, “delivers on everything she promises.”"

That sets my spidey-sense tingling, it does.

2/06/2009 08:56:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Julie,
:-)

2/06/2009 09:19:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Anon 7:08,
You said “good or original ideas”. I choose plain old “good”, thanks.
I have to say, that’s what bugs me about libs especially, and Repubs occasionally. That somehow we just need change or new. Let’s get the “good” down first, ok?
RE politics and hope and change and today’s fashion and such, let’s try this barely used tradition: leave me alone for a change."

Well what bothers me about Repubs is thinking that a failed system is "good." So you stick to failure, if stubbornness is good then so be it. Just because those "good" concepts once worked doesn't mean that continuing to implement them is smart(especially when they fail--either in concept or execution, but they HAVE failed).

2/06/2009 09:56:00 AM  
Anonymous word veri said...

Someone is stuck in the fulag of his own mind parasites.

2/06/2009 10:00:00 AM  
Anonymous ximeze said...

Don't ya love it? Scuttlebutt says Teh One, behind closed doors of course, is waaaay PO'd at Nancester for making Him look like a tool, now that all the junk in her bill is spilling out into public view.

Hee Hee, watching the meltdown gladdens my heart.

The 'united front' presentation is such crapola - as a rule, what's aired for public consumption at the moment rarely reflects what's really going on. Years later, most of the mechanics come out in somebody's book.

2/06/2009 10:10:00 AM  
Blogger Ricky Raccoon said...

Now Anon, I’m already kicking myself for replying to to to “that” but I wouldn’t want you to think I don’t care. Because I do. And I was there myself once.
Maybe this will help: Have you ever seen how those smart firefighters remove in a deep circle around a forest fire all the combustible materials (that’s trees)? Just so we’re clear, “good” is the opposite of not doing that…or throwing more trees into the fire in hope and change it will go out. Because you see, the best thing (best means “good”, not “failure”) for the rest of us is to let the thing burn out. Not throw more green paper on it, there’s only so many trees and no short supply of zeros. That’s “the sooner the better”. Not “the longer the bigger”.
Good night…*smootch* but before I go, remember, if I don’t reply it doesn’t always mean you’re correct.

2/06/2009 11:19:00 AM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

And once that happens, you have a "creature of the Antichrist," so to speak, or someone who has been "born again" from below.

Or how about "dead again" from below?

2/06/2009 06:56:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

From the WaPo article:

"Still others believe the Obamas' dithering on the purchase of a guard dog gave the intruders a window of opportunity."

Ha! The same window the Zero thought was a door. You don't push windows of opportunity President Zero.

2/06/2009 07:04:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Ha ha! Nice takedown of Queeg, Bob!
Queeg was checkmated and he still thinks he has a "chance" to win.

2/06/2009 07:11:00 PM  
Blogger USS Ben USN (Ret) said...

Gagdad Bob said...
Heh.. They'll never take us alive. Except maybe for Ben, if they try using grog for bait.

Only if it's really good grog. I do have standards you gno. :^)

2/06/2009 07:12:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home