This is vintage Voris, with a vocabulary on steroids: "
Dems War on Men" (9/5/12). Excerpt:
... The icon of Democrats, in some ways the man called on to ironically enough preserve Obama's miserable presidency, is Bill Clinton. Could there possibly a larger more loathsome example of masculinity, striding onto stage amid throngs of wild cheering -- and much of that cheering coming from women?! This man deserves contempt, yet he is the leading example of what manhood has become, at least for the Democrats' point of view -- a philandering, adulterous, fornicating, spiteful liar, who had his law license yanked and was impeached for perjury. He is the hero of the Democrats -- an abuser of young interns (remember Monica Lewinsky?), a wife-cheater so notorious that his Arkansas cronies couldn't keep up with his sexual escapades and had to employ what Hillary was once credited with calling "the bimbo squad."
2 comments:
I have no problem with the lying/perjury: the Republicans had no business dragging his sex life into the public square, the lowest of low blows. The other charge (philandering, adultery, and fornication are all the same thing in his case) is serious but militated by the fact that he has a heart. Unlike the Republicans, he knows that working people in this country are getting a raw deal, a really raw deal. While he managed to do precious little to improve things, and may even have made matters worse with NAFTA, the mere fact that he sympathizes with us means a lot. I have never met a Republican with an iota of compassion; somehow it's always YOUR fault that you are struggling to make ends meet.
I beg to differ. I don't think sin of any kind can be compartmentalized as if it had no effect on a man's work. Sin in the heart, and error in the head -- sooner or later.
I also think there may have been a time when the Democratic rhetoric was more than rhetoric, if you know what I mean. When the Irish began immigrating in the 19th century and settling on into the early 20th, they quite rightly made their home in the Democratic party, which was then the party of the working man and, yes, traditional family values. The Republicans were the first party to agitate for women's right to work in the workforce, not because they cared about women's rights, but because the factory owners who backed them knew they could pay women less. As a result, men's wages quickly fell from being a "living wage" that could support a whole family to something considerably less, since both mothers and fathers could be counted on to earn income.
The tide turned, however, somewhere after the halcyon days of the Kennedy dynasty in the 1960s, when the Democratic party embraced embraced the "privacy rights" manufactured by the fatal decision of Griswold v. Connecticut (1965), promoting recreational sex, adultery, and family breakdown, along with its embrace of abortion rights in the same year (1973) that homosexuality was declassified as a mental disorder under pressure from the Gay Lobby (not for medical scientific reasons).
Already with Lyndon B. Johnson's "Great Society" there were premonitions of things to come in the Democratic Party, and by the time Carter and Clinton came along, the ground was well prepared for the language of "investment" in the working man, which, translated, means funding social programs by dint of "quantitative easing," which gives the illusion of propping up the working man's economy (e.g., GM), but at the cost of devaluing the currency.
My parents remember when they had to take a wheelbarrow full of devalued Chinese currency to the market to buy a modest supply of groceries in 1949. Can you remember when gasoline cost 22 cents in the United States? Now it's well over $4.00, with no end in sight. If you watch this play out indefinitely, as you will of Mr. Obama is re-elected, you will see that these sorts of policies do NOTHING for the working man. They enslave him in poverty and dependence. In fact, one could arguably state that the showcase of Democratic policies is Detroit, a city in which not only the majority of residents are on the dole, but the corporations as well. Where will the people turn when the crunch comes?
Maybe you remember the old saying: "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime." There is a place for handing out fish too, granted. But in the long run, people have to learn how to fish for themselves.
If you want a good primer in economic issues from an authentically Catholic point of view, read Christopher Ferrara's The Church and the Libertarian. You might be surprised at what you find.
Post a Comment