There's no reasoning ...

There's no reasoning with a leftist, because all serious leftists will lie about *anything*, including plain facts of life that anyone with two or three working brain cells to rub together can grasp by just opening his eyes.

As witness:

Victor Reppert: "My concern is that with as much money in politics as there is, you might not get all the liberalism liberals want, with government money and involvement used to help people who lack it, but you won't get conservatism either, which is the government keeping its hands off. People who buy influence in Congress want government to help them, which involves getting the government to help those with established wealth. Are oil subsidies liberal or conservative? Government economic proactivity is liberal, but it helps the rich and not the poor, which is "conservative"."

Ilion (from a long post, broken into three of four parts): "... In a republic, it’s impossible to have "government money and involvement used to help people who lack it". For one thing, in a republic, there is no such thing as "government money" - everything "the government" controls must first be taken from "the people". ..."

B.Prokop (the particular hard-core leftist at question): Leave it to "Ilion" to misunderstand (or else just deliberately misrepresent) the most basic things. ...

What this fool (*), this liar and worse than a liar, is trying to dispute is the plain fact that there is no such thing as "government money" for "the government" to pass out to its favoréd clients; that when "the government" passes out favors to some, it does so only afer first forcibly co-opting the resources of others, of those less favored by the ruling elites.

Secondarily, he's trying to dispute the truth that the American Republic is not intended to be, nor can it work as nor survive as, a polity in which there are favored and dis-favored classes. He's trying to stand on its head the foundational truth that we are all equal before the law, by having it that some (i.e. the leftists, such as himself, who know how to run everyone else's lives) are more equal, while some (i.e. "the rich" ... and "the poor" who, like me, despise leftism and all its lying promises) are less equal.

Then, the fool (*) goes on to assert that I am "constantly bleating about how ignorant [I] find[] everybody else ..." Surely Gentle Reader can see the risible nature of the accusation. I mean, even aside from the fact that I don't bleat, I have never once said anything about how ignorant I find everyone else, or even anyone else, to be. What I *am* always on about is the common refusal to think clearly and logically.

(*) As I keep pointing out, that is a moral evaluation: it's about the lack of intellectual integrity; it's says nothing about intelligence.


But, perhaps I have been mistaken; perhaps little Bobbie really does (foolishly) believe that there is such a thing as "government money", which doesn't have to be first forcibly taken from one set of subjects before it can be given to another, more favoréd set.

Maybe, it's like this -- after little Bobbie learned that Parson Weems' tale about the Father of Our Country chopping down his father's money tree and manfully owning to it when Washington père asked was just a pedagogical myth, after he came to understand that young George never did chop down his father's money tree, he reasoned (ahem!) that the money tree must still be there; and that after the Father of Our Country died without issue, his Uncle Sam inherited the tree, and has been carefully tending it and harvesting the money ever since.

So, what do you think, boys and girls? Is little Bobbie a boobie, or is he simply a liar?

Or, have I, perhaps, posed a false dichotomy? Might it be that he is both an idiot and a fool?

For, Gentle Reader, get this ... the fool, or idiot, or both simultaneously, continues digging the hole he willfully jumped into, by letting slip what he really thinks about your and my freedom --

But be that as it may, what he fails utterly to comprehend is that in the United States (by theory, at least) the government and the people are the same thing. There is no meaningful distinction between government money and citizens' money. There are simply wise and prudent determinations that we the people make as to who decides to spend what and where.

We do not, Thank God (and I mean that literally), live in an Ayn Randian dystopia, but in a nation of, by, and for the people.

(Which is what makes the intrusion of anonymous big donor and corporate influence into the process so destructive - thank you, "Citizens United".)

This fool is explicitly claiming that something called "we the people" owns you and me. Now, I've often said that that is his strange belief ... and he has often accused me of misrepresenting, which is to say, lying, about his views and mindset.

But, there it is, direct from the ass himself.

===========
MEANWHILE, Victor Reppert, who is ashamed to be metaphysically associated with the likes of the late Jerry Falwell, whom the leftists hated and still hate because he (generally) did not shy away from clearly stating unpopular and anti-leftist truths about Christ and Christianity, is proud to call that fool, that utterly wicked man, who desires above all things to use governmental force and compulsion to enslave you and me, and all our children unto the nth generation, and to call that slavery Christianity, a friend.