You Get What You Wish For
May 2, 2008 | Phillip Ellis JacksonThe problem with the current Democrat nomination process is that there is no person of non-color to push aside so either Hillary or Barack can be made their standard bearer.
The problem with the current Democrat nomination process is that there is no person of non-color to push aside so either Hillary or Barack can be made their standard bearer.
True leaders are too busy succeeding to wait to be led.
In a world where you can believe what you want to believe because you want to believe it — and your beliefs can be shared by others who want to believe what you want to believe too — there’s no room for genuine dialogue and debate.
There is a difference between wishing that the world was a better place and offering to “change” it, and viewing the world as it actually exists, and attempting to improve it.
We’re going to lose in November not because the other side has a better vision for America. We’re going to lose because the other side had a better grip on reality.
Only those who play the game get to reap the rewards.
When asked to tell us what we actually need to do, rather than tell us what we all need to believe, ideologues on the Far Left and Far Right are uncharacteristically silent.
Those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them.
Americans like to kill people for no reason — now that’s entertainment!
Given the choices we have, do we use our vote to make a statement, or to win an election?
There can’t be a solution until there is a problem.
Another liberal competes in the arena of ideas by opting out of the debate once his ideas are challenged.
You may think you know the answer. But think again.
There has to be a legitimate outrage to protest, before one can protest an outrage legitimately.
It’s a good thing we have a legion of experts to guide us through the trials and tribulations of life. Otherwise, we might not have any idea about what is really going on.
More answers to some commonly asked questions.
We need real world policy prescriptions, not high-minded slogans, to deal with the problems this country faces.
The answer is: they’re both equally nuts. In certain cases, although the foundations of these philosophies are based on polar opposite assumptions, the actual policies they propose are virtually indistinguishable from one another.
Matching political rhetoric with reality.
More answers to some commonly asked questions.
In the end, Raymond Ingles confuses the expression of a so-called public “morality” with the content of a God-given universal moral code, and equates rational action to further an individual’s wants, needs and desires with the intrinsic moral content of human behavior.
More answers to commonly asked questions.
Some answers in life are complicated. Some aren’t. Here’s a quick guide to help understand the questions I’m most frequently asked.
Just when you thought it couldn’t get any loonier, along comes an email from Vermont.
Trust is something that must be earned over time, not simply bestowed upon request — whether it involves your family life, or the adoption of a new national immigration policy.
What do we really know, how do we know it, and what does it all mean anyway?
Here’s a quick guide to the current debate on illegal immigration, and a practical solution that transcends all the major points.
How would history have treated the same events if the “other guy” had won the election?
In an ideal world, my candidate would believe exactly the same things I do, with the same intensity. Unfortunately, this isn’t how the world actually works.
It’s time now to end this discussion where it began, with a return to my friend Harry.
How manipulating the truth is backfiring on the Left.
Here’s what we’ve been told over the years by Liberal prognosticators and pundits as they looked into the future. And, here’s what the outcome really was.
How long before the rot infesting mainland Europe spreads to American shores?
Don Imus is an idiot, but not for the reasons everyone thinks.
The danger of carrying liberal utopian thought to its illogical conclusion is a world less safe than before, and a society less free to advance scientifically than it otherwise might be.
Scientists 1,200 years into the future try to figure out if a country called the USA ever really existed, and if it did, why it vanished so suddenly without a trace.
Those willing to die for the cause of pacifism, rather than “force” their beliefs on anyone else in the face of outside aggression, will always be successful in achieving at least half of their goal.
You should have voted for Al Gore in 2000. George Bush didn’t sign the Kyoto Treaty, and now we’re all going to die.
The 2008 election is still a year and a half away, but we don’t have to wait until then to see how well everything is going to work out once Bush is no longer in office.
What happens when the purveyors of knowledge become the perverters of information?