Heidi Cruz Says Ted Will ‘Show This Country The Face Of The God That We Serve’

I was not affluent, but my folks had the sense to locate where there were trees and jobs.

- - - Updated - - -

Which world is not nearly as nice as it was in the 50's, when the air smelled of apple blossoms and if people didn't have a clean mind, at least they kept it to themselves.

 

Thanks for proving 2 of my points.
The air only smelled of apple blossoms in your world, not the industrialized world where not to many years later, water was catching on fire.
And, I wasn't born in the 50's, so I don't see it as nice as the 70's/80's.
And I think today is better where people don't have to keep their minds to themselves if it is going to cause stress. Stress leads to many bad things happening, personally and then socially.

 

Exactly, which is why it should not be imposed on others without their permission.

Regarding the beauty of the world back then, sorry you couldn't see it.

 

Nothing has been imposed on you. If you have been force to do something, I'd like to hear it.

Does it upset you and cause you stress more people can be themselves?

 

I have an aesthetic desire not to have to listen to diatribes regarding sexual preferences and, for example, peoples' "right" to sue over ridiculous, manufactured issues, particularly when they are people my tax dollars are already being extorted to help support...and similar topics imposed on the liberal establishment by their Marxist extremists.

 

So the 50s were better because gays were forced to live in e closet?

 

NO ONE talked incessantly about sex back then. Peyton Place and a few other books from classical literature circulated clandestinely and Elvis wiggled. These could easily be ignored.

It's not shock or prudery; it's just so damn distracting. It's unaesthetic. It's usually fairly coarse and disgusting so not a good and welcome distraction from whatever else one's mind would otherwise be on.

The other thing, of course, is human energy that would otherwise be sublimated into something less ephemeral is used up pointlessly. The last thing psychic energy should be wasted on is the prurient interests of others.

Really, reticence is the way to go in sexual matters, for all sorts of reasons. Another is the probable loss of arousability in natural ways. We will all end up having to have fertility dances to get it off.

As I said, my objections are aesthetic.

 

But you are not forced?
Gays were forced into the closet or possibly be killed.
Many other now open people had to keep their true selves hidden.

 

Threats of lawsuits can be more ruinous than being beaten up.

It is never fun to be a scapegoat, no matter what the reason. Marxists are good at creating new ones, that's all. They are not better people--simply more annoying, as they never shut up. They pollute the airwaves, and our culture, wherever they can.

I was tolerant for years about all this, as I thought some good might come of it, but I am now convinced they are just as bad if not worse; additionally, IMO they do not have the welfare of our country at heart...I believe they really want destruction.

The traditional liberals have been taken over by subversive Marxists, who are now calling the shots.

 

LOL. Guess you've never been beaten up. BTW - what threat of a lawsuit are you worried about? What is it you do that you think you may be sued?
You are RW? How come they never shut up, and are so annoying? RWers are a minority, yet they pollute airwaves, make fools of the people who listen/watch the idiotic shows and ruin our culture.
The fact you to resort to using Marxist, pretty much shows anything you say is worthless. And is only based on emotional RW propaganda.
If you want to be serious about a debate, lose the talking bullet points and ill informed name calling.

 

No, I'm not RW and I am not personally worried about lawsuits. However, encouraging the disadvantaged to be inappropriately and excessively litigious in the long run will just disadvantage them further, as no one wants to deal with people like that.

If you don't think being inappropriately sued and lied about and losing what you have worked and struggled for years to achieve, I guess you would not understand my point of view.

I stand by my view re, Marxists. Modern liberalism is polluted by their thinking, and IMO there are more direct links than I had thought.

Since you are not open to discussing the matter in a civil fashion, however, have a nice day.

 

When one starts talking marixsm, wanting destruction, polluting airwaves, etc, I already assumed the discussion left being civil.
Have a nice day.
But if you want to keep it civil, I'm game.

 

I don't throw labels around as invectives; when I say "Marxism" I literally mean it.

I'm not the specialist on Marxist history, but someone else in here put me on to the idea that our school systems; approach to education was fundamentally influenced by Marxist thought, to its detriment. I found it an interesting explanation for why better logical thinking is not taught in our schools.

I also see characteristics of Ayres' precepts cropping up in places like the BLM movement and possibly also what some Muslims in key places in some of our universities seem to be up to.

The original goal of American communism was to destroy the American family, etc etc, and much of what they wanted to accomplish seems to have happened. Apparently our social service organizations are also deeply influenced by the thinking. It is possible black families were destroyed on purpose.

That's about all I have to offer; I'm not a detail person. It was enough to make me suspicious, and watchful, though.

 

And who is looking to destroy the country from within?
What is marxist thought?

 

It could be the dead hand of leftover thinking from Communist cell groups or outdated theorists that have had influence in the past.

"Full Definition of Marxism
: the political, economic, and social principles and policies advocated by Marx; especially : a theory and practice of socialism including the labor theory of value, dialectical materialism, the class struggle, and dictatorship of the proletariat until the establishment of a classless society"

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Marxism

It could be intentional, though; I read somewhere there has been a resurgence of Marxist thinking.

What I have been suspecting lately is that it never died but want underground.

IMO it may have or is in the process of taking over American liberalism.

I suppose the better question might be, are American liberalism and Marxism the same thing? IMO they weren't, in the past, in which case it could be maintained there is or was a takeover.

 

The one where the nuts go.

 

Thanks for the definition. I will say I don't see us ever going to a classless society.
I doubt many in the DC politics, if any, are under marxist thinking. In fact, I go just the opposite. Where gov't is in be with huge multinational corporations and all laws, taxes, and regulations are to favor them and screw the people of the country. People have gotten poorer in the last 30-40 yrs, real income has declined. In the same note, productivity has increased and prices have been steady or declined.

Just because more people are becoming more equal in treatment has zero to do with marxist thinking. That is just people being brainwashed, IMO.
So NO, American liberalism and marxism aren't the same thing. I've never heard a whisper of gov't taking owner ship of goods and services.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=444210&p=1065859890#post1065859890
Here is a post that I think is very spot on, from another thread.