Try to drag yourself up into a ditch, strange fly.
And....?
ROFL... Ahh yes... the Flat-nosed contempt for any assertion which speaks to the indefinable notions of Leftism... That hackneyed knee-jerk, reactionary guffaw wherein the opposition chortels disgust against the charge that their closely held feelings are rooted in Collectivism...
Because after all, the Minnesota Democrats are known far and wide for their dogmatic defense of free-market Capitalism and the Individual Liberty which sustains such.
We can rest assured that the assurances from our opposition rests within her direct knowledge of the DFL... We can have NO DOUBT that she's familiar with Communism and it's tendency towards deceit and it's long history of promising Individual Freedom and returning Collective Tyranny.
So... to test that, let's take a gander at a few key elements of the Minnesota DFL 2006-2008 Platform.
The first thing that strikes me, is the cry for that critical element of Left-think; the ethereal; and all too subjective notion of "Fairness":
"At the heart of our party lies a fundamental conviction, that Americans must not only be free, but they must live in a fair society.
We believe it is the responsibility of government to help us achieve this fair society."
Fairness is the critical key to understanding the means by which the voluminous advocacies for all manner of lofty Liberating ideals; advanced through flowery Leftist vaguaries, are summarily snatched back through the much more specific cries for collective control of those things which otherwise set aside those liberties.
The discussion of any fair portion of them would require considerable space, so I'll just hit upon a couple that jumped out at me.
In just the outline of their would-be principles, we find this jewel:
"A society where all people can find jobs in a growing full-employment economy"
Oh that's down the middle American right there... ain't it? I mean that's great stuff... They're looking to secure the means for every individual to 'find jobs' in a growing, FULL EMPLOYMENT Economy...
Then in the next line; there's this:
"A society where all workers are guaranteed without question the legal right to join unions of their own choosing and to bargain collectively for decent wages and conditions of employment."
Oops... So in the span of one rhetorical breath, the individual is now relegated to being subservient to the GUARANTEES AFFORDED BY the LEGAL RIGHT OF THE COLLECTIVE; and considerations for those things which are required for a growing economy are simulataneously set aside; rendered secondary to the unquestionable GUARANTEES inherent in such.
Then there's this indecipherable rant:
"A society where both public and private discrimination based upon race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, religion, ethnic identity, sexual orientation, economic status, philosophical persuasion, or discrimination through lawful means."
Moving on...
Then there's this: "A society where we recognize that the strengthening of the family and the protection of children are essential to the health of the nation."
Oh THAT sounds good... What God fearin' American could be against THAT? I mean after all.. "IT'S THE CHILDREN! and the HEALTH OF OUR NATION, MAN!"
"We OPPOSE: Government interference in all matters related to the control of ones own body, including protection of the rights of women to bear children, practice birth control and obtain safe and legal abortions..."
TALK ABOUT Double-Speak; they frame it as a position which demands the government stay OUT of their rights to murder the unborn child... when in truth; there is NO RIGHT TO MURDER one's unborn child; and what they are demanding is that the government PROVIDE THEM THE GUARANTEE TO DO SO. And after having just spoken to the necessity for a strong family being essential to a viable, sustainable nation.
Poor children... Poor Nation...
And so it goes; where they rant on about the etheral spearation of Church and State; then demand that government tax Churches... Their defense of private property and that governemnt needs to protect the land from the various usuages which may come about through the private ownership of such... and so on.
So we find that the DFL; as was previously noted; is an advocate of the Needs of the Collective superceding the rights of the Individual... OKA: Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, and any of the innumerable revisions/rationalizations inherent in Left-think... and this despite the protestations of the Ideological Left... who need you to believe that such simply does not exist; not in any form, fashion or historical relevance.
ROFL... Ahh yes... the Flat-nosed contempt for any assertion which speaks to the indefinable notions of Leftism... That hackneyed knee-jerk, reactionary guffaw wherein the opposition chortels disgust against the charge that their closely held feelings are rooted in Collectivism...
Because after all, the Minnesota Democrats are known far and wide for their dogmatic defense of free-market Capitalism and the Individual Liberty which sustains such.
We can rest assured that the assurances from our opposition rests within her direct knowledge of the DFL... We can have NO DOUBT that she's familiar with Communism and it's tendency towards deceit and it's long history of promising Individual Freedom and returning Collective Tyranny.
So... to test that, let's take a gander at a few key elements of the Minnesota DFL 2006-2008 Platform.
The first thing that strikes me, is the cry for that critical element of Left-think; the ethereal; and all too subjective notion of "Fairness":
"At the heart of our party lies a fundamental conviction, that Americans must not only be free, but they must live in a fair society.
We believe it is the responsibility of government to help us achieve this fair society."
Fairness is the critical key to understanding the means by which the voluminous advocacies for all manner of lofty Liberating ideals; advanced through flowery Leftist vaguaries, are summarily snatched back through the much more specific cries for collective control of those things which otherwise set aside those liberties.
The discussion of any fair portion of them would require considerable space, so I'll just hit upon a couple that jumped out at me.
In just the outline of their would-be principles, we find this jewel:
"A society where all people can find jobs in a growing full-employment economy"
Oh that's down the middle American right there... ain't it? I mean that's great stuff... They're looking to secure the means for every individual to 'find jobs' in a growing, FULL EMPLOYMENT Economy...
Then in the next line; there's this:
"A society where all workers are guaranteed without question the legal right to join unions of their own choosing and to bargain collectively for decent wages and conditions of employment."
Oops... So in the span of one rhetorical breath, the individual is now relegated to being subservient to the GUARANTEES AFFORDED BY the LEGAL RIGHT OF THE COLLECTIVE; and considerations for those things which are required for a growing economy are simulataneously set aside; rendered secondary to the unquestionable GUARANTEES inherent in such.
Then there's this indecipherable rant:
"A society where both public and private discrimination based upon race, sex, age, color, creed, national origin, religion, ethnic identity, sexual orientation, economic status, philosophical persuasion, or discrimination through lawful means."
Moving on...
Then there's this: "A society where we recognize that the strengthening of the family and the protection of children are essential to the health of the nation."
Oh THAT sounds good... What God fearin' American could be against THAT? I mean after all.. "IT'S THE CHILDREN! and the HEALTH OF OUR NATION, MAN!"
"We OPPOSE: Government interference in all matters related to the control of ones own body, including protection of the rights of women to bear children, practice birth control and obtain safe and legal abortions..."
TALK ABOUT Double-Speak; they frame it as a position which demands the government stay OUT of their rights to murder the unborn child... when in truth; there is NO RIGHT TO MURDER one's unborn child; and what they are demanding is that the government PROVIDE THEM THE GUARANTEE TO DO SO. And after having just spoken to the necessity for a strong family being essential to a viable, sustainable nation.
Poor children... Poor Nation...
And so it goes; where they rant on about the etheral spearation of Church and State; then demand that government tax Churches... Their defense of private property and that governemnt needs to protect the land from the various usuages which may come about through the private ownership of such... and so on.
So we find that the DFL; as was previously noted; is an advocate of the Needs of the Collective superceding the rights of the Individual... OKA: Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, and any of the innumerable revisions/rationalizations inherent in Left-think... and this despite the protestations of the Ideological Left... who need you to believe that such simply does not exist; not in any form, fashion or historical relevance.
I see nothing in there about the dialectic. I see nothing in there about the labor theory of value. I see nothing in there about the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Well, it's not as if we would be surprised that you have closed your eyes to modern reality or anything.
And I suppose you support the right of any female soldier to do the same to you if you look at her the wrong way without invitation?
