Put Me In The Brute Column
Every single Republican leader and official NEEDS to read this and learn from it. Every DFL should read and and realize how arrogant and devoid of real solutions their side is.
This is my favorite part.
This, I believe, is the reason conservative politicians so often lose their nerve, why they back down in debate even when they’re clearly right. No one wants to be condemned as a brute—especially not conservatives, who still retain some vague memory of how worthy it is to be a lady or gentleman.
Far too often we back down for fear of ruining the party or conversation. Far too often our leaders and officials don’t want to be seen as mean or uncaring.
Is it better to give a man a fish, or teach him how to fish so he will never need your handouts again?
Liberals will give the man someone else’s fish, and then tax the other fishermen.
I’m tired of watching leading Republicans turn spineless in the face of elections. I’m tired of Republicans backing away from the ideological battle we are in. I am tired of being “nice” at dinners abnd parties, just because.
Until we conservatives and Republicans are willing to speak our minds and argue on behalf of our values, we will never win the hearts and minds of the average voters. The DFL could care less where and when they aspouse their liberal agenda. So why are we?
Go read the rest! It is really a great piece, and goes to show you that far too often, the strongest voices on behalf of conservative Republicans values are most often shunned by our own side. Take Jason Lewis for example, he’s treated as an outcast by many Republicans because he is in the brute column, as was David Strom for his honest evaluation of Pawlenty’s “Fee” back in 2005. They are often made out to be ememies by party leaders.
But they are in fact the ones being honest and real. Then there’s people like me who pull very few punches in our criticism of our own online. We’re often more feared than cheered. We’re considered enemies for our sometimes brutal assessment of our own.
Well, I know I do it so that hopefully my side, that I agree with most often on the issues, does better. We cannot defeat the DFL if we are more concerned about being well liked in the cocktail circles. We cannot be win the ideological struggle when we’re more concerned about covering our own butts and those who have skeletons to hide, when we should be working towards the goal of ending the DFL’s tyranny of this state.
Conservatives and Republicans need to get some cajones, and realize pretty dang quick that the biggest problem we face is that we aren’t willing to take the fight where ever it needs to be fought. We cannot redeploy the ideological battle to phone banks and lit drops. We’ll never win an election by listening to speakers in seminars.
It is across dinner tables, in line at Target, at the bar, on teh softball fields of Minnesota that conservatism must be fought for. There is no quota for voter contacts through calls and door knocks that will change the political thought process of Minnesotans. It must be done when and where people least expect it.
Most people don’t even answer their phones anyh longer come election time. I know I don’t. I know what klind of crap is on the other line when the phone rings in October. We have got to take this battle to where the people are. We have all got to start spreading the good word of conservative Republican ideas and values where voters least expect it, but are most suceptable to considering it. In our everyday lives.
I had only planned a quick note on this, but I guess I got inspired by reading this. I hope you all go read this column and get as inspired as I have, and go talk conservative politics at will.
OK, gotta get to work.
(end of rant)
Sphere: Related Content
Dialog…
AAA has a post up today that really caught my eye. He linked to a City Journal diary that summarizes a problem that Conservatives face on a daily basis. “The thing I like best about being a conservative is that I don’t have to lie. I don’t have to…
At MFC we experience the same problem. A perfect example is the mandate for comprehensive sex education in HF6.
We’ve researched several sex ed curricula used across the state. Frankly, some of the activities taught are unhealthy. But when we attempt to inform the public we get attacked by those who support it, ignored by the media and our own supporters become so uncomfortable they don’t want to get involved.
For example, The Birds & Bees Project, which claims to reach 8,000 metro area public school children per year, teaches students how to perform anal-oral sex – rimming – with a dental dam. (If you would like to see the brochures go to MFC.org.)
Talk about a conversation killer.
However, which disgusts you more, that I’ve made you aware, or that metro area youths are being taught how to do it? Are you upset enough to talk about it?
Do you know what happens when good people refuse to speak out? Supporters of anal-oral sex become emboldened. Andy Birkey at Minnesota Monitor recently stated “How is anal-oral sex with a dental dam unhealthy?†“Of course, if you are monogamous with one partner and both have been tested for STDs, which is what responsible sex ed teaches, then there is not real health risk at all.â€
I guess love means never having to wear protection.
MFC did a press conference on several sex ed curricula last month. Do you think the press reported the subject matter – of course not. In fact one reporter said it was debatable whether anal-oral sex was unhealthy.
I believe most people with the slightest grain of common sense understand that it is not healthy to engage in anal-oral sex. However, Birds & Bees teaches youths how to do it using a dental dam.
Can anyone produce a shred of medical evidence that anal-oral sex with a dental dam is healthy?
On the House floor, Rep. Tom Emmer tried to shed light on another egregious sex ed project a few weeks ago and was scolded by several DFL Reps for passing out such objectionable material.
But it’s ok to teach it to our children.
Lastly, I am sure that some of you are “offended” that I would write about rimming. Others are so uncomfortable they don’t want to hear anymore and can’t get away fast enough.
Here is the rub, sooner or later you are going to have to talk about it. Get used to it now – on your own terms – or be forced to talk about it later, because it’s being taught to your children.
Rolo May said something like, for contemporary man the opposite of courage is not cowardice but conformity.
You can demonstrate non-conformity now by calling State Senator’s Saltzman, Rummel, Wiger and Clark. They’re on the conference committee crafting the house and senate version of the K-12 Education bill.
I’ll make it easy for you, tell them to remove the comprehensive sex ed provision that mandates sex ed across the state of Minnesota.
Tell them you are opposed to it because several curricula teach children how to perform unhealthy sex activities.
They will know what you are talking about because other “brutes†have decided to talk about rimming today, so they won’t have to talk about it with their children later.
Way to take my comments out of context, Mr. Darrell. Very, um Christian? of you. Just because I state the facts of the health risks of a certain sex act does not mean I support or endorse it.
“I guess love means never having to wear protection.” You do realize in that comment thread I just got done talking about using protection, right? I’m not sure where you get that. One would think that after ‘investigating’ sex ed curriculum, some of it would rub off.
Here is a copy of Andy’s complete statement.
What is your definition of unhealthy?
For starters define unhealthy. Hint: It differs from immoral. How is anal-oral sex with a dental dam unhealthy? And if you answer HPV (you oppose the vaccine, chuck) or hepatitis my head is going to explode.
You can get HPV or hepatitis from shaking someones hand who didn’t wash after using the restroom, and we all should be vaccinated for both anyway. You won’t get trichomonas, syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, bacterial vaginosis, HIV, or a host of other diseases when a dental dam is used correctly. Of course, if you are monogamous with one partner and both have been tested for STDs, which is what responsible sex ed teaches, then there is not real health risk at all.
You see, the problem with this debate is that you conflate immoral and unhealthy. They are different. I’m fine with injecting morality into the sex ed debate as well, but I’m not going to debate health with folks who really mean morality.
Thanks Chuck. That was in response to Chuck’s question: “How about telling them its unhealthy? The issue is that anal, and anal-oral sex is unhealthy – even with a dental dam.”
I stand by the public health behind my answer. People are free to find the practice distasteful (no pun intended), but that differs from unhealthy.
Lets not confuse “practice” with health.
Show me the medical evidence that proves anal-oral sex is healthy.
Show me the medical evidence that proves “anal-oral sex is healthy if you are monogamous with one partner and both have been tested for STDs,…”.
I’m not asserting that anal-oral sex is healthy in the way an apple a day is healthy. I’m saying it’s healthy (if both partners have no STDs and use a dental dam) in opposition to your assertion that it is unhealthy. You started the debate on the health risks of oral-anal sex, and I gave you the response that it is not inherently unhealthy. It’s neutral.
My logic is simple: If both partners have been tested and are STD-free and a dental dam is used, then the transmission of a disease from one person to another is impossible. Hence, not unhealthy. That’s the science, that’s the public health.
Show me the medical evidence that proves that two partners who are STD free and using a latex barrier for oral-anal sex is unhealthy.