Clearing Up Typical Liberal Stupidity

Recently I had the opportunity to appear on Jake’s Show at Wide Awakes Radio. His show, Welcome to America, Now Speak English, is about illegal immigration. He has attracted the attention of a guy named Dan who believes that it is perfectly OK to have millions of ILLEGALS here in the country because they are good for the economy. This begs the very first question and that is, is this moonbat actually admitting that we have a good economy when all the moonbat leaders say it is horrible? The thing I take issue with is that this person misrepresents what people say and write.

During the discussion with Jake we talked about college professors and how most of them are liberal and that our children are forced to tolerate the liberal bias to get an education. We talked about how young minds are indoctrinated into liberal ideas because professors force their views on students, rather than just teaching. Examples such as Ward Churchill and (at the High School level) Jay Benesch were used. We also discussed immigration and how the government needed to curb ILLEGAL entry and then set a reasonable limit as to the number of people who may LEGALLY enter each year. We even discussed a possible moratorium to help get things straightened out.

There was mention of this guy Dan and a piece he wrote about Jake’s previous show. We discussed the ideas about the economy and it is no secret that I feel the economy would be hurt very little by the removal of ILLEGALS. They consume more resources than they produce, they hardly ever pay taxes, and they send a lot of their money back home so it is not used in our economy. This guy Dan seems to take issue with this and declares that our economy will fall apart without ILLEGALS. I just don’t happen to think so. After all, we did fine under Reagan when there were a third or so of the ILLEGALS. Instead of making a rational argument, Dan likes to attack people. As a matter of fact, on the show I questioned Dan’s manhood because he attacked Jake’s wife. He has written a post trying to defend it by saying that she is a blogger and holds his views. A weak argument by a pathetic person. The fact is, she had nothing to do with the original exchange and Dan attacked THE WAY SHE LOOKS. He did not say “well his wife is just as bad as he is because she believes and writes about the same thing. Instead, he attacked her physical appearance.

I said it on the show and I will repeat it here. That is no man. It is a coward. Only a coward would attack a woman when the beef is with her husband. If you have a beef with anyone then attack them based on the discussion, not based on what they look like. In the end you might agree to disagree but the discussion is civil. When you attack a woman (or the way anyone appears) then you have removed the original argument and made yourself the target for a smackdown or your manliness. You see Dan, Jake and I have a few differing opinions about some aspects of immigration but we discuss them civilly and we agree to disagree. I certainly do not twist words or paint false pictures as you have done.

Dan wrote a piece at his site and he misstated what was said. He told everyone that Jake and I advocated home schooling instead of college, not the truth and his post leads people to believe that Jake and I were home schooled. I can not speak for Jake but I went to a Catholic School and went to a public High School. As for the idea that my college education was received in my home, it is ridiculous. I have a college degree in the field of medicine and do fairly well in that endeavour. Dan also chose to use a snippet from my site as some indication that I have some backwards view on IMMIGRATION. He chose a piece I wrote that was a sarcastic rebuke of the way they are going about enforcement. I said that at the rate they were going it would take 500 years but that it was a start. Any moron should have been able to see the sarcasm in the statement. It was meant to indicate they need to round up way more of them to make a difference and that the small numbers would have little effect. As one person commented on the post, “half of them will be back by morning.”

Dan also published the picture of me from the top. He indicated that I fancy myself to look like that. Well I really do because that is a caricature of me. That was an actual photo taken when I was training with the UK Army. I used a program to turn it into a cartoon looking character. To refute the rest of Dan’s lies:

No one said critical thinking was not good. We said that using the line that we are unable to engage in critical thinking is designed to give the impression that one’s argument is not as valid because they have no ability to use critical thinking. We talked about this the way we discuss the elitists in government (and especially their liberal supporters) and how the left often uses the insinuation that a person is not intelligent enough to understand or can not engage in critical thinking. We did not say critical thinking was bad only that those who use the argument that others can not engage in it are using a poor method to make their point.

I have already discussed the college issue. No one indicated that people should not go to college. We indicated that the liberals who have infested the colleges should teach and leave their personal views out of the classroom. They should not be using the classrooms to influence people’s beliefs, they should be teaching and allowing people to form their own opinions. As I previously stated, I went to college. Fortunately, I did not have problems with teachers because I let them know where I stood and what I was paying for with regard to my education.

Dan would have readers believe that he was threatened and that Jake and I believe we are tough guys. In the overall scheme of things, I am when I need to be but the wisdom of middle age has blunted the rough and tough times of my youth. The idea that anyone was threatened is ridiculous. What I challenged was the manhood of anyone who would attack a person’s wife and the way she looks when that is not part of the argument and quite honestly, when she is not involved in the argument. I maintain my original position and that is Dan is a coward. Dan attacks Jake’s wife and he did so again in the post. He did so because he is not able to argue as a man. He slithers around attacking women and in my book that makes you a coward. If she were part of the discussion or had chimed in he could attack her but she was not involved. This was a cheap shot to incite anger in Jake. To me, it was a lack of critical thinking that made him do it. If calling a coward a coward is a threat then I am guilty. I just happen to think it is the truth. To show what kind of coward he is, he track backed his post to an item I wrote that had absolutely nothing to do with the issue. It was a post that is not up front and it has nothing to do with the discussion. It was his way of letting me know he did it, but he did it like the coward that he is.

The last point is the comment that the President should go to hell. The post by Dan leads people to believe that we both said that in some Neanderthal ritual over a fire. The fact is, I was not even on the air when that comment was made. I entered the on air discussion because of that comment in order to say that while I hold Bush accountable for the state of immigration he is not the only one at fault because this has been going on for years and years. A lot of Presidents have ignored this and this is the reason we have the problem we do. The fact is, once again Dan fails the critical thinking test.

He does attack my ability to think or reason but once again he uses a partial reference to show me as some idiot.

So even though it is not a good thing to have all the illegals entering our country we can at least put to rest the idea of a poor economy. Even with the back-to-back hurricanes and rising gas prices, things are fairly good as far as our economy goes.

This came from a post discussing the economy and the liberal claims that our economy was bad. The article discussed that even with all the bad things that have happened we have been able to keep a stable economy. The article also discussed that more ILLEGALS were filtering in to take jobs because the economy was good. The idea was Immigration is up when the economy is good. My point was that the presence of ILLEGALS did not make the economy good, that the GOOD economy attracted ILLEGALS. You would not know this from Dan because he was unable to use his vaunted critical thinking skills.

I will not label Dan a troll. That would be giving trolls a bad name. Dan has used his blog to attack people and to try and get any attention that the radio program might stir up. He has used half truths and deliberate distortions to try and present an argument. He has, and the item I took the most issue with, attacked a woman who was in no way involved in the discussion. That, in my book, makes him a coward.

I am done with this guy. I expect the attacks to continue and he is free to do so. People who know me know where I stand on issues and I don’t need some panty waisted coward with little in the way of life experience telling me how things ought to be. I deleted his trackbacks, not because I did not like them but because they were trackbacked to a post that had nothing to do with the issue. Dan, you would do well to stop playing until you can exercise some critical thinking skills.



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

3 Responses to “Clearing Up Typical Liberal Stupidity”

  1. Laurie says:

    What’s that saying about entering a battle of wits unarmed?