No soup for Nelson

Rush mentioned this incident on his show yesterday, from Politico, January 14...

soup nazi 2.jpg

Nebraska Sen. Ben Nelson and his wife were leaving dinner at a new pizza joint near their home in Omaha one night last week when a patron began complaining about Nelson's decisive vote in favor of the Senate's health care bill.

Other customers started booing. A woman yelled, "Get him the hell out of here!" And the Nelsons and their dining companions beat a hasty retreat....

"It was definitely a scene in there," said Tom Lewis, a 41-year-old dentist and registered Republican who witnessed the incident. A second witness confirmed the incident to Politico.

It's a new experience for Nelson.

ben nelson, abortion, nebraska first.jpg

He used to be a popular figure back home, a Democrat who served 8 years in the governor's office and was elected twice to the Senate by a state that's as red as the "N" on the University of NE's football helmets.

But Nelson has seen his approval ratings tumble in the wake of his wavering over the historic health care bill, his deal-cutting with other Senate Democrats and, ultimately, his support to break a GOP filibuster and send the bill to a House-Senate conference committee....

Nelson, who has a track record of brokering bipartisan deals, said for months that he was unsure whether to back a Democrats-only bill, and he criticized language in the measure that would impose taxes and cut Medicare costs in order to pay for extending coverage to most Americans. But after weeks of negotiations, Nelson made his peace with the bill by striking deals on his state's Medicaid costs and on abortion language -- and, in the process, incited a furious backlash in NE.

Anti-abortion activists who have supported him in the past have abandoned him; he's been the target of a fierce campaign by opponents to push him to block the bill on final passage; and the GOP now sees the opportunity for a pickup in 2012.

Meantime, Nelson is still viewed warily by more-liberal Democrats who distrust his conservative leanings and remain upset with his opposition to a public option.

"He's kind of a man without a state," said Julie Schmit-Albin, executive director of NE Right to Life, an influential anti-abortion group that had endorsed Nelson's previous election bids but has "pretty much cut [its] ties" with the senator over the abortion deal in the health care bill. The group plans a rally Jan. 30 in front of the state Capitol in Lincoln and will weigh whether to use its influence to go after Nelson ahead of 2012, when he is up for a 3rd term.....

[HT: Susie A.; NE photo via Politico]


Comments:

Sixty Democrats in the Senate and not a SINGLE ONE will stand up for the unborn and against the worst destruction of human beings in our history.

What a tragedy.

Posted by: Joe at January 15, 2010 1:03 PM


Amen Joe!

How many 10's of millions have to be slaughtered before we wake up, as the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ, and as a Nation.

Posted by: Ed at January 15, 2010 1:07 PM


On the football helmets. The "N" stands for knowledge.

Posted by: xppc at January 15, 2010 1:51 PM


Sorry Benedict, there is a spiritual law at work in the Earth today:

You reap what you sow.

Sow betrayal toward and contempt for the unborn...

Posted by: Ed at January 15, 2010 1:55 PM


Oh poo. All those complaining at the pizza shop are merely ASTROTURF...didn't you know? No one REALLY hates this healthcare plan. The American people WANT this...they just don't know it yet.

I wish I could've been in that pizza shop! There would have been some pepperoni flying let me tell you!

Posted by: Sydney M. at January 15, 2010 2:28 PM


I wish I could've been in that pizza shop! There would have been some pepperoni flying let me tell you!

Posted by: Sydney M. at January 15, 2010 2:28 PM
*****************

LOL!!!

I would have made sure you didn't run out of ammo Sydney!

Posted by: Ed at January 15, 2010 2:42 PM


Boy, Nebraska is way behind the times, they still 'go out' for pizza. Here, we just have it delivered. ;)

Posted by: Andy at January 15, 2010 4:52 PM


The cook looks like Dennis Miller of Miller Time

Posted by: Maria at January 15, 2010 5:27 PM


Now wait a minute, Andy!


We have a home grown pizza franchise here in Nebraska called Valentinos and they have a buffet with pizza and pasta and other goodies. Some people go OUT to Valentinos for Pizza. Some pick it up and some have it delivered.

Not sure where Benedict Arnold was, but it was probably a fancy place where you order your pizza while you dine in (you can do that at Valentinos and Pizza Hut,but the article says it was a new place).

We're not behind the times. :p

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at January 15, 2010 5:43 PM


Nice to see civil folks out there can behave like adults. I don't care what the issue is - yelling at folks at a restaurant on their night out is embarrassing. That coupled with the "tea party" movement and equating political leaders with Hitler - I think part of this nation has lost their damn mind.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 15, 2010 7:32 PM


I agree "part of this nation has lost their damn mind", yes Ex-GOP, when 50 million babies have been legally slaughtered in their mother's womb and "it's a woman's right to choose" to dialate a her cervix, mutilate and dismember her innocent, unborn baby with a currette and use a cannula to suction the dead baby out her uterus. Sounds like "this nation has lost it's damn mind" to me too.

Posted by: Prolifer L at January 15, 2010 8:23 PM


This nation HAS lost its mind when its current president wrote in his memoirs that he stands with the muslims even as that entire religion declares war on the world.. when we can't even verify that he is a NATURAL born US citizen...when he made racist comments in his memoirs and sat under the preaching of a white-hater for decades...when he voted that babies born during an abortion attempt should be tossed into a closet to suffer in agony and die...

Yes, we voted this egomaniac in...CLEARLY we have lost our minds.

Posted by: Sydney M. at January 15, 2010 8:38 PM


I like the Tea Party movement.

ExGOP: would you have been a Rebel in the Revolutionary War or a supporter of the Crown?


If it hadn't been for the ORIGINAL Tea Party, we'd more than likely STILL be under British rule.

Posted by: LizFromNebraska at January 15, 2010 9:06 PM


You preach it LizFromNebraska!!!! AMEN!

Posted by: Sydney M. at January 15, 2010 9:47 PM


Pro-Lifer - Good points. I was talking about the lack of the ability for folks to engage in civil discourse - but you make a valid point as well - I don't think this country knows what it honors or values anymore.

Sydney - I can't even respond to that - I stopped reading at the US citizen remark. That's as crazy as those 9/11 conspiracy theory folks.

Liz - My point is, when has it become okay to yell at a person when they are out to eat? When is it okay for an elected official to yell at the President during an address? Why have we become so angry? The original tea party was a pretty impressive thing. This current tea party is a a short-sighted, hypocritical mob. Okay, I'm sure there's many good pockets of it - but what I've seen of it reminds me of the environmental protests during big G8 summits - like people who are more excited to yell and cause issues than actually present solid thoughts or ideas. That's my issue with it.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 15, 2010 10:49 PM


Ex???

I'm trying to figure you out.

Why are you surprised that God-fearing Christians would rise up in righteous indignation and call this guy out for betraying his constituency and the thousands and thousands and thousands of babies that he voted to pay to have killed?????

After he ran a campaign pledging/committing/proclaiming he was Pro-Life?

This guy is a two-faced liar. A typical politician.

Have you ever been betrayed? Did you get angry? Was Jesus wrong when he drove the money-changers out of His temple? Was He impolite? Should He have asked them to leave nicely?

How much evil are you going to sit by and tolerate and do nothing to resist before you get a backbone and take a stand for righteousness, life and defense of the most innocent and vulnerable among us?

Posted by: Ed at January 15, 2010 11:07 PM


You know Ex,

You might as well get used to it because I believe you haven't seen anything yet. If anything, I see the Pro-Life Army becoming more militant, more adamant, more fiercely determined to see an end to the horrific genocide of abortion and see justice restored to our Nation.

Let me be clear. We need to absolutely and unequivocally condemn all physical violence with regard to our Pro-Life activities.

That said, I pray God raises up in this generation thousands of mighty men of women of godly character, conviction and passion - saints who will with one voice shake our Nation with their condemnation of abortion.

Our Country needs to have a healthy Fear of God.

Posted by: Ed at January 15, 2010 11:27 PM


When he voted to fund abortion with our tax dollars, Benedict became complicit in the childrens' murders - just as the guy who pays the hit man is as culpable as the murderer pulling the trigger or wielding the suction knife-edged curette.

At this point, Health Care hasn't passed so he's really only guilty of conspiracy.

He still has time to right his wrongs.

Posted by: Ed at January 15, 2010 11:52 PM


Edmund Burke said, ‘The only thing necessary for the triumph [of evil] is for good men to do nothing.’

Ex-GOP would have evil triumph...but I already knew that.

Posted by: xalisae at January 16, 2010 12:23 AM


Nice quote for Ex, X.

A great quote for all of us.

Posted by: Ed at January 16, 2010 5:36 AM


Posted by: xppc at January 15, 2010 1:51 PM

On the football helmets. The "N" stands for knowledge.

-----------------------------------------------------

Not for or against the Cornhuskers unless they are playing against 'my' team but the quip is "EXCELLENT"!

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 16, 2010 7:56 AM


Wow - okay Ed - so do you believe it is okay for folks to yell things like "get him the hell out of here" at somebody at a restaurant if you don't believe with their views?

I'm interested to know your thoughts on what an angry country would start doing? I mean, they sure didn't show up at the polls in SD or Colorado? And even these "great news" polls saying folks are pro-life - have you seen the further questions on most of them in regards to overturning R v Wade? It's eye-opening if you ask me.

xalisae - you do a wonderful job googling quotes, but I'm not sure what you're even trying to say? So, just because I wouldn't yell at somebody while they were out to eat with friends and family, I would like evil to triumph? Two questions - do you feel like that is appropriate behavior? And secondly, do you think that type of behavior is more likely to lead him to the vote that you'd like him to cast?

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 16, 2010 8:09 AM


Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 15, 2010 7:32 PM

Nice to see civil folks out there can behave like adults.

I don't care what the issue is - yelling at folks at a restaurant on their night out is embarrassing.

That coupled with the "tea party" movement and equating political leaders with Hitler - I think part of this nation has lost their damn mind.

--------------------------------------------------

X,

If you ever were a 'republican' you were a RINO.

I doubt if you were even a fiscal conservative.

I have met you.

The 'Party' was YOUR church, YOUR country club, YOUR social service organization all rolled into one. You were a blue blood charter member of the 'good ole boys'.

You 'say' all men are created equal, but you really believe some are more equal than others.

The less equals were NOT allowed a seat at the table in the smoke filled back room of YOUR 'big tent'.

The 'less equals' were only allowed in the back room to serve the martinis and empty the ash trays.

You were more concerned with maintaining control of 'YOUR' party than you were about doing the right thing.

Political expediency was your watch word.

When conservatives began to exert their influence in numbers of people who actually participated in the process you rolled up your 'big tent' went away whining about the exclusionary attitudes of these 'young upstarts'.

You excluded yourself.

Rather than learn to work with people who did not view the world exactly the way you did you ran home to mommy like the petulent child you are.

"I don't care what the issue is - yelling at folks at a restaurant on their night out is embarrassing."

No one likes confrontation but Nelson by his political tone deafness had demonstrated the days for polite civil conversation were over.

Nelson 'sold out'. He capitulated. He caved in. He folded. AFTER he had made public announcements about his 'committment'.

The issue is not so much the 'issue' but that Nelson's hyprocisy and dupilicity were so obvious.

Then Ben tries to make it look like he got something good for Nebraskans in additon to the 'thirty pieces of silver' he got for himself.

We do not yet know what those 'thirty pieces of siver' were, but we will in time.

Nelson should be tarred and feathered and ridden out of town on a rail (figuratively speaking) for spineless selfserving coward that he is.

You can recruit him to me member in 'YOUR' party.

yor bro ken


Posted by: kbhvac at January 16, 2010 8:38 AM


Ken -

You have no idea who I am.

Also, we debated once before. You were so massively wrong on a statistic that you pulled out that I find it hard to believe that you can comprehend a lot of the issues that we're talking about. When pointed out, I still don't think you understood what was going on.

So I read the first few lines of your posts and move on. No offense, but it seems like you have a few posts in word and you copy and paste them in.

Thanks Ken - have a great day.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 16, 2010 8:43 AM


Excellent points Ex. Let's take 'em one at a time:

"so do you believe it is okay for folks to yell things like "get him the hell out of here" at somebody at a restaurant if you don't believe with their views?"

Absolutely not. If I did, I wouldn't have a right to complain if I was trying to enjoy my dinner somewhere and was run out of the restaurant by a mob of angry pro-aborts.

I see the difference this way. As stated above, the good people of Nebraska have supported this man and his Pro-Life convictions voting him into public service as Governor and Senator for the past 18 years. They thought they knew their man. We all did. He boasted, "My vote's not for sale." He told Bart Stupak not to worry, he had his back. They were a team. We were all counting on him to be true to his convictions, true to his word, unwavering in his defense of innocent unborn children.

So what does he do? In typical political fashion, he compromises. His vote was for sale, medicare for Nebraskans, 30 pieces of silver, whatever. He thought they'd throw him a parade in NE for the pork he brought his state, what he earned was the same contempt he demonstrated toward innocent boys and girls in the womb.

Ordinarily, I would like to think that I would have let the man enjoy his meal, but sometimes that rage starts to boil up. Personally, in that position I always pause and check my reasoning and my motives before I let loose, which frankly is pretty rare. I did go off on you a bit in my above posts, but I do so with the best of intentions.

Babies are being slaughtered everyday by the thousands and thousands and thousands, women are being victimized in the same proportion, and it's high time someone in this country puts their foot down and says, "No more, not on my watch, not in my generation.

The killing stops now."

"I'm interested to know your thoughts on what an angry country would start doing?"

You're absolutely right, we've been way too passive at the polls.

But, the good news is we are starting to wake up. What should we do? 2Ch7.14 until we receive the godly sorrow and repentence detailed in 2 Cor 7.11.

That is what Lou Engle has been calling our nation to for years and he is one of the organizers of the March for Life down in Houston this Monday, Martin Luther King Day to protest the new PP abortion super center. Look for some good media coverage on Fox or CBN News, listen to Lou speak and you'll see exactly what good, healthy, proper righteous indignation against evil looks like.

Posted by: Ed at January 16, 2010 10:03 AM


Ed -

Thanks for the response - so we agree then, it was uncivil for folks to yell at somebody while out eating at a restaurant. That was the narrow focus of my original post - I think it is sad we have so much yelling these days and so little listening.

I am proud to say I don't even know the channel number for Fox News - but I'll take your word for it. The poll numbers I'm referring to though is more people are pro-life, but in those same polls, the majority of folks don't support overturning R v Wade - so they are pro-life, but it must be a personal conviction (they personally would choose life), but not something they want to see put in law. Thoughts?

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 16, 2010 10:39 AM


Ben Nelson refused to hear the people of Nebraska during his representative negotiations on the Health Care Bill. He put his party over the people of his state. Maybe in Washington he can choose not to hear us. When he is out in public in Nebraska, he cannot. In running for public office, and in garnering pro-life support, Senator Nelson pledged that Nebraskans and the sanctity of human life would be defended in Washington. We didn't shut Ben Nelson out, he shut us out.

Posted by: Cathy at January 16, 2010 11:11 AM


"I'm interested to know your thoughts on what an angry country would start doing? I mean, they sure didn't show up at the polls in SD or Colorado? And even these "great news" polls saying folks are pro-life - have you seen the further questions on most of them in regards to overturning R v Wade? It's eye-opening if you ask me."

Hey Ex,

Allow me to respond to this line of questioning more directly.

First, may I commend you for having a heart that I believe is honestly searching for what your proper response should be in light of the great moral issues of our day. It seems like you want to be a good conscientious citizen of the good old USA and fulfill your civic responsibilities. You are diligent and look to polls and voting results as you try to reconcile your own convictions with the fulfillment of one of your primary civic duties - your vote.

I've learned that public opinion is fickle. People tend to give the President too much credit when things go well and too much blame when things go poorly. Furthermore, most people aren't really happy with the lives they've created for themselves and a lot of them blame the government for their problems. They want the government to be their "mother" and take care of them. So we have these blocks of liberals and conservatives and a bunch of moderates in the middle that swing back and forth creating the alternating Republican/Democratic cycles at the polls.

So rather than looking to polls to check other people's opinions when determining what my own reasonable position should be on any given issue or candidate...I look to God, the leaders in His Church, and His Holy Word. By connecting with God and seeking His Heart, I endeavor to be changed, to become like Him, to know His will, and to serve Him and my generation accordingly.

Therefore, I'm trying to fulfill my Christian obligation, to be salt and light in a dying, corrupt, sin-sick world, and influence the culture of my generation. Salt cleanses, preserves and seasons. My aim is to clean up immorality and corruption, take a stand against evil and wickedness, and live a life that causes someone who doesn't know Christ to want to know Him. Light exposes darkness and I try to do that with my words and actions as well. It begins with my own heart.

So I try to live bearing the Fruit of the Spirit, Love, Joy, Peace ... and occasionally show my anger toward unrighteousness and sin.

If you want more information, check out this link.

Peace

Posted by: Ed at January 16, 2010 12:01 PM


Hey Ex,

Don't misinterpret me. Sure we all need to treat each other with a certain amount of respect and civility but Benedict violated that when he betrayed the trust of his constituents. I probably would have sent him an email voicing my displeasrure but I can't say that if I was in that restaurant I wouldn't have said something.

Roe v. Wade is state-sanctioned genocide. It should be overturned, absolutely.

There are many lies that people believe that justify abortion or their passivity on the issue. Alan Shelmon classifies them this way:

1) They assume the unborn is not a human being. 2) They disqualify the unborn from being a valuable human being based on an arbitrary quality or characteristic.

As I said in my post earlier, I believe my job is not to react or conform to public opinion, but to influence it for Righteousness and Truth - or like Jesus did, die trying.

Posted by: Ed at January 16, 2010 12:20 PM


Got some work to do Ex.

I'll check back in tonight.

Posted by: Ed at January 16, 2010 12:22 PM


Two questions - do you feel like that is appropriate behavior? And secondly, do you think that type of behavior is more likely to lead him to the vote that you'd like him to cast?
Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 16, 2010 8:09 AM

Yes, and yes. If someone is lying, say they are a liar, and prove how. I'm sick of all of this tip-toeing around what people really mean when they say something, and the political obfuscation that is going on to protect their seats in office. Joe Wilson is my hero. Let's call a spade a spade here.

Here's another quote I googled for you:

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
--Thomas Jefferson


Be afraid, Obama and Nelson. Be very afraid.

Posted by: xalisae at January 16, 2010 1:34 PM


On his key point, I'll have to agree with EGV, here: the behaviour of the people in the restaurant wasn't good, and they shouldn't have done so. Understandable? Definitely. Excusable? I'm afraid not.

I know that hindsight is 20/20, but: I think it would have been perfectly within right morality--and quite a bit more eloquent and high-impact,actually--if everyone else in the restaurant, after seeing Ben Nelson enter, had dropped to dead silence, all left their tables (perhaps with leftover food in take-out containers), paid their bills, and left immediately--leaving Nelson alone in the restaurant with his immediate eating companions.

Posted by: Paladin at January 16, 2010 3:52 PM


I disagree, Paladin. That could've easily been shrugged off or ignored, and DEFINITELY downplayed by media. The time for cordial subtlety is over, I'm afraid.

Posted by: xalisae at January 16, 2010 4:02 PM


"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
--Thomas Jefferson

Be afraid, Obama and Nelson. Be very afraid.

Posted by: xalisae at January 16, 2010 1:34 PM
********************

X, you've got my nomination for Quote of the Day.

Ex & Paladin,

I'm with X on this one. It makes a difference if it's your senator and you're paying his salary.

If I had been there, I would have walked over and said, "Excuse me Senator, but you are a public servant, therefore you work for me. I hired you because you said you were Pro-Life and you assured me that you would work and vote to protect my interests and defend the unborn.

You've done a lousy job.

Not only did you fail to protect innocent unborn children, but you voted to spend more of my hard-earned tax dollars to pay doctors to kill the very children I hired you to protect!

Then as I glared at him in the eyes, the devil on my left shoulder would probably whisper, "Go ahead, spit on his pizza, you paid for it." And then the angel on my right would say, "Whoa there, you've done enough, he got the message."

And then I'd sternly say, "Enjoy your pizza", and walk out.

Posted by: Ed at January 16, 2010 6:45 PM


Ed...and if Nelson would have been the vote that health care reform failed on, the other side could have said that same thing - that he works for them, and people came out and voted for him because that was a major campaign issue (for the Dems).

Also, I think that if all Christians (at least those self-identified) didn't have abortions, and worked in the communities to support women going through this - then there wouldn't need to be laws at all.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 16, 2010 8:18 PM


Maybe LizfromNebraska can help us out here but I'm 99% certain Benedict ran as a Pro-Life candidate. If the Dems have a problem with him voting Pro-Life, he shouldn't have been their candidate. They have nothing to complain about if he did what he said he was going to do in the campaign. Gotta disagree with you there Ex.

I don't get your second paragraph Ex. Christian women (and non-Christian women) do work in their communities to support women in crisis pregnancies. They call them Crisis Pregnancy Centers. But we still need laws, specifically one that criminalizes abortion.

You lost me.

Posted by: Ed at January 16, 2010 8:31 PM


Ed,

He's characterizing Christians as hypocrites. Typical pro-choice propaganda B.S. from a RINO

Posted by: xalisae at January 16, 2010 9:27 PM


Copy that X

Thanks

Posted by: Ed at January 16, 2010 10:17 PM


xalisae -

Not all Christians -I'm not painting a broad brush here - I'm a Christian myself. When you look at the available stats though, aren't you shocked by the number of people who label themselves as Christian yet have abortions? What do you make of that statistic? That's what I'm trying to say.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 17, 2010 8:23 AM


If once claims to be Christian and destroys innocent life, they aren't reading their Bible.

"13 For You formed my inward parts;
You covered me in my mother’s womb.
14 I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;[b]
Marvelous are Your works,
And that my soul knows very well.
15 My frame was not hidden from You,
When I was made in secret,
And skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
16 Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.
And in Your book they all were written,
The days fashioned for me,
When as yet there were none of them."
Psalm 139:13-16

Posted by: Leslie Hanks at January 17, 2010 8:49 AM


Ooops!

Once = one

Posted by: Leslie Hanks at January 17, 2010 8:51 AM


Ed-

Yes, he ran as pro-life. He also ran under the Democratic party and all the other things that the party comes with - health care access being one of them. Unfortunately, votes are going to come up that run contrary to multiple ideals that a candidate has. Yes, he's pro-life, but he's also (my assumption as him being a Democrat, but seeing his quotes afterwards, I think this is accurate) big into expanding access and decreasing costs. His vote was going to tick off one of those two ideals there, plain and simple. And didn't the Senate language leave abortion up to the states in regards to the exchange? He represents Nebraska, and thus they can decide.

Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 17, 2010 9:02 AM


Ex,

No. As I understand it, the Senate language requires all taxpayers to subsidize abortion coverage (I don't have the language handy to quote). The Stupak Ammendment maintains the status quo, no federal funds used for abortion. Benedict could have made that his position. His constituents that wanted abortion would have the same access they have today.

Right?

What did you mean about not needing laws. You seem confused.

Posted by: Ed at January 17, 2010 1:32 PM


I wouldn't say they were hypocritical. I think there are a lot of people who use their faith to legitimize what they have done. "It's alright, because the baby just goes to heaven." See: "Pro-Choice Christian" and others like her who post on this blog. Heck, the other day I read someone here talking about how they support legalized abortion specifically because they have faith and feel that "God wouldn't let someone lose their one shot, so the soul of an aborted baby just goes back to wait to be put in another body." They're using their faith as a rationalization, not that they are hypocritical. They just lack a complete theological understanding of the situation. I think that Christianity and other religions on the whole tend to trip over themselves in the abortion debate. Either their faith becomes a reason for the killing being ok, or they just try to ply the faith so hard to people who don't want or need it, they end up shutting that person off to the plight of the unborn permanently.

Posted by: xalisae at January 17, 2010 1:56 PM


Xalisae wrote:

I disagree, Paladin. That could've easily been shrugged off or ignored, and DEFINITELY downplayed by media. The time for cordial subtlety is over, I'm afraid.

Just to be clear: my concern is not for the Senator's "feelings", per se... but nor am I concerned with the "feelings" of the restaurant crowd, either, when figuring out what's right and what's wrong.

Also: I wasn't talking about the political/tactical expediency of the "mob yells"; I was talking about its morality. Expressions of displeasure are fine; and assembling peacefully (even if angrily) to discuss it and plan morally licit action (e.g. a Town Hall meeting or Tea Party--two excellent ways to organize resistance to the Culture of Death) is fine. Even Ed's proposed "stern dressing-down" seems okay, to me, since it wouldn't simply attack and/or show rage; it communicated displeasure and content in a relevant and clear way, without silly and immoral ad hominem attacks, or mere cruelty. But yelling for someone to "get outta here", and "booing" them does nothing but vent one's spleen, and it's not right. I couldn't care less whether it's "effective" or not; our morality shouldn't be dependent on "whether the other guys do the same, or worse", and it certainly shouldn't be dependent on whether we thought it "worked" or not. Heck, burning down someone's house with everyone inside would "work", too... but it's immoral, right?

Respond to them, by all means. Write letters assuring them (in civil terms) that their actions are foul and immoral, and you intend to do everything in your power to prevent their election to the office again. Use the media to tell what he did wrong, and why it's wrong. But if we descend to a mere mob and simply scream our displeasure, then--above and beyond the fact that it's wrong, and nothing justifies evil means--why should anyone listen to us? If I were the type to enjoy screaming, I'd listen to "screamers" who agreed with me; wouldn't you?

Posted by: Paladin at January 17, 2010 3:32 PM


Posted by: Ex-GOP Voter at January 16, 2010 8:43 AM


No offense, but it seems like you have a few posts in word and you copy and paste them in.

--------------------------------------------------

You really should get a moniker that accurately communicates who you are instead of who you are not.

If I had posts saved in 'word' and cut and pasted them I would have spell checked everyone of them and corrected them for syntax errors as well.

Unlike you, I do intend that my posts should 'offend' progressive/liberal sectarian and secular humanists.

Your egos are usually so overinflated that my mission is not often a difficult one.

I find the 'blunt truth' to be the most effective in accomplishing my goal.

I choose not to be subtle or diplomatic but find the most effective words to rub liberals the wrong way.

I take great joy and satifaction in goring your sacred golden calfs.

I suffer under no misconception that I am better educated or more intelligent than some of the 'leftists' who pass through here, but I have lived long enough to know that wisdom has little to do with IQ.

Most progressive/liberal fools are educated far beyond their intelligence.

One my favorite colloquialisms sums it up pretty well.

I first heard former Texas Governor Ann 'wrinkles' Richards use the gem when she perceived some silver tongued devil was attempting to sell her lipsicked pig in poke.

"Don't go peein down my leg and try and tell me it's rainin."

As soon as you figure out just who and what you are, you have a good day too.

yor bro ken

Posted by: kbhvac at January 17, 2010 5:18 PM


And your way has been a resounding success thus far, hasn't it, Paladin?

Here's my last googled quote for the night:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson


I believe that fervently. Seriously...what kind of paladin are you if you're not willing to actually FIGHT?!

Posted by: xalisae at January 17, 2010 9:08 PM


And your way has been a resounding success thus far, hasn't it, Paladin?

I'm not aware of "my way" (which is Christ's way, not mine--though I follow it) being followed enough to tell. It's hard to tell if an experiment has been a success if it hasn't yet been run.

Here's my last googled quote for the night:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
-- Thomas Jefferson

Ah. And it makes no difference to you how that blood is spilled--whether by the tyrants, or by the right patriot? Is it perfectly all right for patriots to turn into tyrants, so long as "refreshing blood" is poured out? No... so long as morality means anything at all, that cannot be; no matter how many people throw right and wrong away, we who claim to fight for what is good and just must obey it... or else, what ultimate good can we do, if we become that which we hate?

Seriously...what kind of paladin are you if you're not willing to actually FIGHT?!

I think you've mistaken me, rather seriously. I am more than willing to fight; I only think (in addition) that fighting with honour (which is the sacred trust of a paladin) is also required; the WAY that we fight matters. Any idiot can slash, rape and burn opponents; any oaf can scream, insult, froth at the mouth, and join in a mob action... but what need of a paladin, for that? What need for morality at ALL, for that? It's only a farce, with two equally amoral (or immoral) sides clashing together. Is that what you want?

Think carefully and logically about this, for a moment: why do you believe you're right? Do you have any basis for thinking so? Why should anyone support "your side", or champion "your cause", if it's only one baseless and random opinion among many? The people who are pro-abortion are not inhuman monsters, no matter what our emotions and slogans say; they're human, with human dignity, and they're woefully deceived and/or corrupted, and no type of warfare which forgets that can ever be called "good" or "just". If you seek to kill them simply because you don't like them (or their views), then you've removed all relevant moral difference between them and you, anyway.

Every paladin knows that fighting is sometimes necessary; but it's a *regrettable* necessity. Every paladin knows that even lethal force is sometimes required, in some battles; but never for its own sake, and never for unjust cause. The moment we become willing to do evil "to win the cause" is the moment the cause becomes meaningless... and anyone with a clear head can see that.

Posted by: Paladin at January 18, 2010 11:40 AM


That would be the way of civil discourse. That would be the way we've been going. Being called anti-science liars that hate women, and then being shouted down so loudly when we have to explain ourselves by the media that the country thinks we really are just that. Fighting desperately against lie after lie after lie, only to hear it again and again and again from new and different people, because it's been propagated by the other side ad nauseam. I'm tired of hearing all of their lies, trying to refute all of what is said, but all the while, the opponent just ducking the original statement all together, and trying to do that in a cordial debate format!

When you become as tired of all of that as I am, and tired of the payoffs and back room deals, the midnight sessions of closed congress trying ram legislation down the throat of a people who don't want it, maybe you'll be as ready to fight and angry as I am. There is nothing dishonorable about forcefully showing the truth to a liar. Liars and thieves have no honor, and they should be treated that way.

Posted by: xalisae at January 18, 2010 1:06 PM


Xalisae wrote:

That would be the way of civil discourse.

Perhaps... but I was talking about morality, not civility per se.

That would be the way we've been going. Being called anti-science liars that hate women, and then being shouted down so loudly when we have to explain ourselves by the media that the country thinks we really are just that.

Yes, I know... and believe me: it sickens me, just as it sickens you. But notice: one of your very complaints was about "being shouted down so loudly [etc.]"; and rightly so. You obviously think they're *wrong* in doing so. But in response, you advocate doing the very thing you decry in them?

Think about this reasonably, for a moment! Even if we leave right morality aside, what on earth do you think you'll gain by allowing yourself "the right to scream, froth and attack without discretion"? Do you seriously think that people--either on the other side of the issue, or in the (possibly mythical) "uncommitted independents" will be converted to your cause? My experience is that, when people start screaming incessantly, they get muted, turned off, or switched in favour of another channel. In short: if you indulge your passions and vent your spleen, it'll only relieve you for a moment (if it doesn't make your feelings worse), and you won't gain anything of any long-range worth, anyway!

Fighting desperately against lie after lie after lie, only to hear it again and again and again from new and different people, because it's been propagated by the other side ad nauseam.

Right, again. So will you, for example, allow yourself to lie about them, on the pretext that "they deserve it, and can't complain if we fight fire with fire"? (Anyone with sense knows that fire is fought with water, not fire, anyway.) If "civility" can be thrown away, then why not throw away honesty? Why not burn them all alive, and slaughter their children so that they don't "breed" and indoctrinate new promoters of the culture of death? Where will this end?

I'm tired of hearing all of their lies, trying to refute all of what is said, but all the while, the opponent just ducking the original statement all together, and trying to do that in a cordial debate format!

If your abortion opponents have been that civil and cordial, then you've led a charmed life! Even in the civic arena, pro-death politicians are usually the first to go "caustic".

But look: I definitely understand your disgust at those who, wearing an oily smile and affecting fastidiously civil tones, lie and distort and promote death. (This can be seem\n in what I sometimes call the "jocular, affable trolls", some of whom even drift through this blog.) Their actions are foul in the extreme, and they will answer for them--sooner, or later. But driving yourself rabid isn't the answer; it'll only impair your own ability to think clearly, and it'll likely scare off anyone who doesn't already agree both with you and your methods! When you fight the culture of death, you don't want the end result to be the rest of the world watching you foam at the mouth in wide-eyed horror, and to have your enemies smile, laugh and point at your antics as "evidence of your irrationality and wrongness". Don't let your (completely understandable) zeal for willing a small and temporary battle lose the war for us!

When you become as tired of all of that as I am, and tired of the payoffs and back room deals, the midnight sessions of closed congress trying ram legislation down the throat of a people who don't want it, maybe you'll be as ready to fight and angry as I am.

I already told you: I'm probably already as angry as you are, and I'm quite as willing to fight as you are (and I've been fighting all along). But I fight differently; I try my best (despite what my raving passions want me to do) to fight without doing evil, myself. That's all I can do. If you want to despise me for being a barbarian berserker, fine: but it makes no sense for you to despise me for "not being a fighting paladin" if the very definition of "paladin" means "he who fights with honour and virtue, and who avoids evil means".

There is nothing dishonorable about forcefully showing the truth to a liar.

Agreed, so far as it goes... but the force must be under control, not simply sprayed, willy-nilly, like steam from an exploding pressure-cooker! If "force" means clear language without either political waffling or childish braying, then yes; if "force" means "losing it" and attacking by whatever means are at hand, then no.

Liars and thieves have no honor, and they should be treated that way.

So... liars and thieves have no honour, so you're deciding to emulate them? No... again, if morality is to have any meaning at all, we need to tell our berzerker-passions to shut themselves up, and tame them. Not only will a "no holds barred" approach corrupt you, but it won't even do what you hope it will do (i.e. defeat your enemy).

Posted by: Paladin at January 18, 2010 1:51 PM


Sorry... critical omitted word in the above:

If you want to despise me for [NOT] being a barbarian berserker, fine: but it makes no sense for you to despise me for "not being a fighting paladin" if the very definition of "paladin" means "he who fights with honour and virtue, and who avoids evil means".

Posted by: Paladin at January 18, 2010 1:58 PM