Hey, JHo, stop lying – Your “we need a conversation” has been going on since the 60s

by Skip

Jennifer Horn with Kool-AidYou and Eric Holder (he of the “I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, a nation of cowards” slam against the US) are of the same ilk.  Really, do you really think you own the moral high-horse to be telling the rest of us we have to have a conversation (or else!) like what Hillary said?

And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

Yeah, this coming from a tax cheat – so much for moral high ground (and cheating a small businessman to boot) and who booted others from the NH GOP Committee simply because they stood up to her (so much for THEIR conversations, eh JHo?):

“What unfolded at the convention completely blindsided us,” Horn said. “We were unaware that there was going to be a challenge or there were any concerns.

I am very disappointed that we did not have the opportunity as a party to engage in what I think is a long overdue open, honest, respectful debate about these important issues.”

She said she believes the move was part of an attempt by some to try to shut down debate on the two amendments she sponsored. Other delegates in the room “believe they were just applying” the state party’s rules, she said.

Like what has been said before, nobody “shut down” the conversation – she was defrocked because she tried to game the system – and now she’s trying the Democrat tactic of becoming a victim.  Poor, poor Jennifer – they’re all agin’ me!

This conversation on this topic (in case JHO has been completely blindfolded) has been raging since the 60s.  Here in NH, it started a decade ago over civil unions and has not stopped since so where does JHo get off by impugning that the conversation hasn’t be had?  The Left hasn’t let it stop – and now JHo has joined in with those that have no problem in putting those with deeply held religious beliefs out of business, out of their homes, out of their families.

I’m all about talking with almost everyone but when someone wants me to subsume my beliefs to make themselves have the feelz, the answer is “No”. She seemingly believes that grown men and women that make up the most active part of the NH GOP haven’t a clue as to what they SHOULD believe.  The Left has a monoculture of belief and demands the rest of us bend a knee to it like King Nebuchadnezzar demanded. They have gone from demanding tolerance, then demanding acceptance, and now, affirmation.  For many, that’s a bridge that is way too far – that this is NOT progress to mandate a certain kind of belief.

What did happen was that people decided to play by the rules – well established rules and you’re hating on them for doing so.  Given that you won’t own up to knowing the rules (er, you WERE the Chair, right?), does that now make you “Excuse JHo”? She’s only concentrating on that she wanted everyone to give her an excuse to not have to follow the rules.  What she never has mentioned, and that has been pointed out countless times, is that she has said NOTHING about her “allies” that failed to rally to her defense.  If anyone is to be blamed for not “having the conversation”

No, “Excuse JHo”, should it be more like”Don QuixJHote”?  After all, it does seem like she was the only one out there ready to tilt at the windmill of traditional marriage.  Which, actually ended up having a BIG conversation – she lost by a 2-1 margin.  The conversation she is so dying to have actually happened: 2/3rds of the delegates there said that The Rule Of Law was to be upheld – and that trumped (see what I did there?) your changing of the social mores that no one wanted.

Again, look above to what Hillary was demanding of others – you WILL bend to The State. Your beliefs are of no account and we will force you to change your heart.  Fearing God?  No, fear ME was the message she sent and it was sent under the condition that if she became President, the full weight of The State will fall upon you.  Heck, the precedent was already set for the force of State by Obama in a number of different ways, most harmful to believers was the forcing of abortifacients on people believing it was murder.  Murder of innocent unborn babies is still murder even if sanctioned by The State.

How is JHo any different in this? People don’t want to be hectored, lectured, and maligned simply because they refuse to go along they believe violates their beliefs.  Two to one they said – “No”; that’s a conversation in and of itself.  Short?  Certainly.  But sometimes, that’s all that needs to be said – short, sweet, and to the point.  No flapping of gums ad nauseum.

Unless, of course, you’re JHo.  You see, she said this:

“I believe very strongly that Republican principles are what our nation needs to solve the problems that we face, and I remain committed to advancing those principles and to helping get strong, solid Republicans who are committed to freedom, equality and opportunity for all,” she said.

The Platforms says this:

“We believe that traditional families are the foundation of strong communities, and that family life best nurtures love of country, faith in God, morality and concern for others.”

and

The platform has long recognized “marriage as the legal and sacred union between one man and one woman as ordained by God, encouraged by the state and traditional to humankind, and the core of the family.”

Her conversation was demanding that, like the Democrat Party, both lines be dropped – was it because of the mention of God?

What this really comes down to is this: absolute or always changing values.  I stand on the former – she wants the latter.  One says “this stands alone”, the other says “on a whim and a wisp; always malleable”. She, like the Dems, want Society to determine what your values are to be; she’s not hep, like Obama, to those of us who are clinging to our deeply held religious beliefs than to some Progressive version of “Social Gospel”.

That’s not a conversation – that’s an ultimatum.

 

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: