Pleasing Your Enemies Does Not Turn Them Into Friends

I watch Kurt Schlichter whenever I can via Rebel TV. This guy is personable, humorous and
knowledgeable. He is on the John Cardillo Show regularly.

Of the 11 columns Kurt has written this month which discuss this same issue in almost exactly the same way, this is my favourite.

It's probably in the top 5 of the 783 columns Kurt has written since Trump's inauguration which discuss this same issue in almost exactly the same way.

Kurt always says it well.

This sentence I thought was particularly great, "having a last ditch veto over their goal of Venezuelaizing America". Sadly, Canada is slowly being Venezuelaized by a succession of radical leftist governments.

Interesting how many comments in the original article are about cutting TV cable service - this is something we can all do.

Here is a real world example of just how WOKE I’ve become ...

I received a Jury Summons in yesterday’s mail. Fine, OK, I’ll go do my civic duty. Then, I kept reading and noticed I was being summoned to Superior Court in Richmond, CA. Richmond, CA. ... where drive-by shootings occur routinely right across the street from this courthouse. Richmond, CA = Compton, CA (North). The ghetto. Now, my County also has Superior Courthouses in Martinez, and Walnut Creek ... both of which are closer to my peers ... suburbanites. Richmond is “urban” ... not my peers, not my peeps. Years ago, I have served on a jury (weeklong trial) in Martinez. But ... but ... Richmond? WTH? It’s nowhere near where I live. Then I recalled that the wife was called for Jury Duty at the same Richmond Court just last summer. Double WTH!? Why ... is the Richmond Court calling for jurors from the Lillyest white of upper middle class suburbs to be a juror in the darkest heart of the Bay Area ghetto? You don’t suppose this is happening ... on purpose, do you? I do.

So I have decided on a course of action in response to what I perceive as some feeble attempt at social engineering. If I am empaneled and questioned as is the routine course for jurors, I will tell the Judge and the open court that I CANNOT carry out my duties fairly and without bias, and that I am unsuitable as a juror. Why? The reason? ... “White privilege”. Yes, I intend to tell the whole court, that I cannot be a fair juror ... because I am “white”. And “privileged”. Hey! I’ve been lectured and scolded to CONFESS ... CONFESS!! (criminally) my privilege. So that I will.

And with the removal of ME from the jury pool ... the court will have lost a juror who actually knows something about “evidence” and “proof”. An educated, experienced, juror who can actually weigh evidence and render a fair verdict. It is likely that an ACTUAL criminal will go free ... and continue a life of crime on the streets of Richmond. Too bad. My privilege precludes my participation.

I don't know how much faith I'd put in a guy who wrote the following:

https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2016/04/04/trump-is-toast-and-good-riddance-n2142633

Don't argue with statist identists, don't debate them, don't look for common ground, don't look for compromise.

Defeat them. Refuse to acknowledge their assumptions. If you do, they'll crash the door down on you.

Stop it there or you end up with garbage like climate change consensus, government "investment" and mansplaining.

Met a friend in the woods. Socialist maybe not, but definitely anti-capitalist to the point of being anti-human.

He said there were two "source codes" to animals. He started with "privilege" iow the strong dominating the weak.

I stopped him there. No, I don't accept that; he was making a moral judgment about other species & nature.

I told him we just happened to be the smartest animals on the planet, driven by instinct like the rest.

He said humans weren't that smart compared to other species. I asked him if the trees in the woods told him that?

He said humans judged other species by human standards. I asked if he had input from other animals?

I didn't let him drive a wedge between humanity and the world, a requirement to continue his thesis.

Anyway I stopped his argument cold by not accepting his first premise. He never made it to the second.

That is what I mean about not accepting their premises, which means their argument is consequently invalid.

Emotion driven leftists expect you to prove your point to their satisfaction, but are surprised when you expect the same.

Their arguments are of course unassailable in their minds, but imho they've never really thought them through.

Arguments without context are anti-intellectual and dishonest. Emotion is belief, not proof of anything.

Their conclusions become invalid & paradoxical because of their involvement with superficial emotionalism.

With me from now on they don't get out of the starting gate with that crap. Try to find common ground?

To them that means you not only do what they want, you agree with what they believe, indeed must "celebrate" it, and assign yourself to a lower moral and intellectual order, requiring their social license.

Just point out their obvious contradictions: the list is long and legion, we know it. Remember leftists loved Hitler and Mussolini in the 30s. Useful idiots nowadays carry "stop Fascism" signs while shutting down public meetings. People react with violence to ideas that don't conform to their pre-determined anger and what those they hate say.

You are the enemy. Treat them in kind. Give no quarter to their anti-intellectual ideas of a coercive state.

dear monitor pulEEZE let my post thru.
I just *complemented* almost ALL of sda. are you getting infected with the antifa virus?

"he thinks like me"

Lets be clear about something Kate: you don't think, you feel and then rationalize. You and Kurt are not thinkers. Hopefully you're a better writer Kurt is terrible. That entire article is one watery diarrhea of culture whine.