....You say it’s a political fight now, as though it’s somehow different than 60 years ago. I’m saying it’s not. It’s the same fight now that it’s always been. We just haven’t fought it as well. As Ted suggested, we are busy with jobs and families etc. And I’ll go back to my original statement which is to take a look at who has been winning for the last 2-3 generations. Sure hasn’t been the Right.
Definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over but expecting a different result....
I'm up for a bit of conversation. I never said it's a political fight now, I thought I said I wasn't fully buying into the actvism theory? I keep mentioning today, because yes, today is different in many ways, than sixty years ago? On the other hand, now you mention, it's only two to three generations of winning for the left?
Today, aren't generations 12 to 14 years? Sixty years ago, that concept was stigmatized, a small example of the many changes that make it a stretch to say, things are the same? I won't make any assumptions of Ted's meaning, but I know what it means to me, the left does not value jobs or family. Correction, the left is invested misery and victimhood. Exaggeration, not if we look at the victimless crime industry or public health industry, for starters?
Maybe, one narrow definition of insanity is to invoke dated models as infallible, yet have countless examples of recent relevant changes? No big arguement today, I am questioning that pro right of center issues are achievable through activism, for the various reasons, we've both come up with. So, what do we do to make your concept work, only disclaimer, please don't say the way of Canada?
