Liberals can be anti-Marxist.

Repetition and persistent reinforcing presence matters.

Be the subject or else they’ll objectify you.

Enemy roster checks.

President – Mary Kay Henry

We don’t hear much about them, do we, these powers behind the throne, the shadow dwellers.

Republicans can’t fight people they can’t even name. Those Who Shall Not Be Named in America. Zimmerman, of course, is named and targeted, precisely because being in the light will burn away the shadows. They were planning on burning away the flesh and the soul too, but that didn’t go as well as their 100,000 other victims in the past few years.

The fundamental error made by the Tea Party was to prioritize elected office over the ground game.

Hostages and women in domestic abuse relationships also don’t want to blame certain people.

While difficult to get them out of the brainwash effect of the cult, it is not impossible. However, doing so will require something beyond politics or even activism.

If a person’s free will is damaged, “reason” doesn’t particularly work very well. Propaganda, psychological control, however is just as effective, if not more so, for a “damaged” person.

How damaged is that damaged person? Is he just a human that makes mistakes in judgment or has he been reduced to a slave or even to a mere tool that does as he is told, with no will of his own?

That doesn’t answer the central question. How would you have beat the ATF, Obama’s Regime, Eric Holder’s IRS, and various other organizations in the Tea Party’s “activist” shoes?

You say the Tea Party failed due to an incomplete or incompetent application of Marxist activism, did you not.

The Right has done so. As I mentioned in my comment, the Left responds with ad hominems that seem to work perfectly well.

I have a friend, a long time friend. His career was in sales – insurance, autos and real estate. He worked long and hard to achieve a stable retirement. He lived by conservative values and he’s no dummy. But he falls for the Left’s rhetoric, hook line and sinker. Why? IMO, it’s about their ability to always frame their position as the high moral ground. Whenever we talk about family responsibility, fiscal sanity, low taxes, pro-growth energy policies, or any of the things needed to set the ship aright, they are there with the charges that the Right is racist, anti-common people, anti-environment, and pro the evil money grubbing capitalists. How do we overcome that except by carefully accumulating concrete evidence of the failure of their policies? Where I see the Right going wrong is in their open pursuit of political advantage. (Even though it is necessary.) Trying to make Obama responsible for all the failings isn’t working. He is the Teflon Man. We should just understand that and go for the substance of the failings and connecting them to Progressive/Statist policies. Obamacare is certainly one example. Quit trying to assign blame to Obama. He isn’t running for anything. And he didn’t write that atrocious mess. It was written by Reid/Pelosi and a bunch of medical lobbyists. The democrats got it passed (barely) and it is their steaming pile of dung. Even my old friend recognizes that it is a mess. But he doesn’t want to blame Obama for it. See what I mean?

Cheers!

On an earlier thread, you defined yourself as a “liberal,” but you are clearly a “not-liberal.” I’ve had trouble calling myself a “conservative,” and I believe you do too. We’ve been brainwashed all our lives to fear “conservatives,” “Republicans,” “the Right,” and other non-cool people. That’s why “neo-neocon” was such a nice term during the Iraq War, though it’s meaningless now in 2013.

What I’m saying to you here is, make the jump. Identify yourself as a “not-liberal,” a “tea partier,” etc., whatever works for you.

As Thomas Sowell pointed out in one of his many books, the “left” has defined words so that anyone who doesn’t subscribe to their increasingly insane ideas get tarred with some non-cool brush, such as “the Right.”

Embrace the suck. Be who you are. Dare to abandon the old terms, and stand up for the “narrative frame” that most of us neo-neocon readers have already accepted. We are “former liberals.” We aren’t “the Right.” We’re people who believe in common sense, limited government, and the basic ideas of the U.S. Constitution.

Unfortunately, there is no adequate word to describe us because the Left has gained the high ground in the battle for words.

I’m just speaking personally to you because of your self-identification as a “liberal,” and I know you need to make that final mental leap to accept the fact that you’re a “former liberal.”