Like others, I have noticed the determination behind the Democrats attack on Rush Limbaugh. Those of you who have looked into the charge may reasonably feel that it is much ado about nothing. You may wonder at the perseverance of a twisted argument so easily exposed by simply checking the facts. If you have followed politics for long, you should also know – this is the Democrats – it has nothing to do with facts.
There may be some left-leaning thinkers out there who might consider actually thinking before making up their minds about who to vote for; an activity that the Democratic Party will discourage at all costs. If Hillary can’t win by chattering mindlessly about a vast right-wing conspiracy, then she can’t win. A campaign consisting of reasoned debate about real issues that real people care about, exposing the actual underlying principles, beliefs, and intentions of candidates would not only mean losing the race, but quite possibly the demise of the party.
So it begins. Democrats want to fire up the emotions of all those left of center thinkers without allowing them to actually think. The attack on Limbaugh will transform many of them into political zombies who will march in whatever direction Democratic Party candidates tell them to go. You will see the zombie effect next year – easily – in discussions on the web as well as in the acceptance of the mindless chatter of pundits and political advertisers. Regardless of what real people are normally concerned about and where they might stand if thinking objectively about issue-centered debates, they will blindly copy-paste the party talking points with great conviction and closed minds.
Worse yet, it has an instantaneous effect on their opposition. How can any right-minded person even consider voting for these brain-washing dunces? Even if we have complaints about the alternatives, we are already well on the way to settling for the lesser of evils rather than having a political effect.
The big loser in the Democratic strategy is democracy. The majority will quickly settle in with one side or the other, trying (harder each election cycle) to think of it like putting on a comfortable old pair of shoes. We will understand when both sides take extreme positions and make compromises with which we cannot possibly agree for the sake of capturing undecided voters (whoever they are). We must accept it to assure that the other side does not win. And as we do, we more surely lose the power of our vote than if we cast it to a “third party” candidate who actually promises what we want.
