Recently, I heard Barack Obama say it was unpatriotic to oppose his
agenda. However -ot words seem to be derived from the word
zealot.
Thus a bigot would have originally described a person
zealous for their own ego for example, a trait liberals are far from
exempt from. Then patriot immediately appears to have originally
meant
zeal for the fathers. Of course this term then could only be used
to
describe those who are conservative, as conservatism has to do with the
preservation of long-held principles that have been found to be true,
wise, logical, and practical. Those who want to supplant
conservative
principles in the efforts to radicalize society are not zealous for the
fathers but rather for unproven, unwise ideas that the fathers would
have never endorsed.
They could be patrons however.
The entire entitlement mentality is based on the idea that some are
deficient compared to others and cannot compete on an equal basis with
those considered more advantaged. Thus the patrons have to
intervene
on their behalf. Then after their entitlement constituency
becomes
entrapped by social programs, the patrons low valuation of their
ability is validated, keeping patrons and those patronized locked in a
system that does not free the entitled from whatever binds them.
It is
not surprising then that another conflict of interest arises.
Largely,
all of these elite believe in evolution. Eventually evolution
comes to
an elitist conclusion: Which race is most evolutionarily
advanced? I
leave it to your imagination how this lines up those patronized to be
inferior to those patronizing them. Indeed, if these radicals
were
true in their kindness, evolution would not continue with them as an
acceptable ideology. This discrepancy is not surprising however,
because there is an unholy alliance here of those who were at one time
genuinely wronged with sin-activists who were willing to patronize the
the cause of the former in order to convert a tide of change to sinful
ends and to the harm of America.
If some would deny that sin-activism was working in this way, a famous
incident in 1968 showed otherwise. A political debate leading up
to the Presidential election featured famous conservative William F.
Buckley advocating Republican interests pitted against Gore Vidal who
advocated the Democratic position on behalf of Hubert Humphrey.
Somehow the debate took an angry turn and in the exchange Buckley
called Vidal a queer. When this incident appeared in the national
news itself, they kept the open secret that Gore Vidal actually was a
homosexual in favor of allowing the public to believe that this was
only an outburst of political anger. Outside of that stage,
writer Gore Vidal wrote profanely in support of every sort of
immorality and his gay lifestyle was no secret among those sympathetic
to him. In view of the its normally eager use of controversy to
boost ratings, the silence of the media on Vidal's homosexuality seems
odd. Apparently, Vidal had the complicity of his media allies to
continue his agenda with the help of their cover. The praise
heaped on Vidal a few years ago on the occasion of his death revealed
just how many allies he really had. Shameful!
A more patriotic idea
As the foundation of conservatism in America, bible-believing
Christianity has a better
idea. All men are created in the image of God.
So God created man in his own
image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he
them. (Genesis 1:27)
For this reason the Founding Fathers declared the same conviction in
the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be
self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by
their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are
Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
For patriots who hold these values, the expectation — that able-bodied
persons should work if they can rather than rely on social programs —
is an
expression of faith that those patronized are indeed capable of
competing fairly on a level playing field. In contrast, the
patrons need to prop their unsustainable system on the perpetuation of
an appearance of inequality. What a sham! It is also ironic
that this correct view of oppressor and liberator has a parallel.
Republican Abraham Lincoln was the one who liberated slaves from a
elite Democratic land-holding establishment. It is amazing how
propaganda can obscure the truth!
Document History
August 1, 2013 Created.
August 1, 2013 Added example of Gore Vidal
to show sin-activist use of the civil rights movment.
