Thoughts from the ammo line

Ammo Grrrll notes an important point about the left to which our friend Bill Voegeli devoted an entire (invaluable) book: NEVER ENOUGH. Ammo Grrlll does here it in a single column:

I knew a child many years ago, abandoned by her mother at a young age, who kept reliving that feeling of abandonment by constantly upping the ante in demands until she was told “No” and she could have a meltdown.

One day we went on a lovely outing to a local park and rode on the paddleboats on the lake; she asked to go to an amusement park, which we did. She asked for so many treats she got sick. She asked to ride on many rides until she came to one for which she did not make the height requirement. She went nuts. “Why didn’t you say ‘No’ sooner, you ask?” I truly wanted to see exactly what it would take to make her happy. The answer: it couldn’t be done. She was damaged. It became quite clear that she didn’t ENJOY being happy.

Because most conservatives identify as responsible “grownups,” and many leftists of either sex identify as spoiled, mean, high school girls, I think “progressive” politics has proceeded in a similar fashion. I could give ten examples; I will just use one today.

There are many conservatives who either have someone in their extended family or know someone who is gay. So, when gay couples wanted to have some kind of commitment ceremony, many conservatives attended such events. (In one case, my very redneck neighbor in Minnesota hosted a ceremony in his backyard for a lesbian friend. The stupid, made-up epithet “homophobic,” like its cousin, “racist,” is flung like poo by monkeys, but is generally a lazy, convenient lie or wild exaggeration.)

But very soon a “commitment ceremony” wasn’t enough. We noticed that in our Reform synagogue the ancient words “husband and wife” were systematically getting replaced by the bland and meaningless “partner,” preparatory to erasing all distinctions between marriage between a man and a woman and marriage between two people of the same sex. I thought it would take longer to undo thousands of years of culture and tradition. I was wrong. Things that take millenia to build can be destroyed in a heartbeat.

In 2000, there was a vote in ultra-blue California on same sex marriage. All the Right People backed it. Yet traditional marriage won handily. But the sore losers were relentless. Here comes 2008, the First Black President is about to win and he is thought to have broad coattails. Try, try again. Whoa! What’s this? Black people, who turned out in record numbers, also believed – as the black candidate himself declared when asked – that “marriage” is between one man and one woman. Same sex marriage lost again.

Then one gay judge wiped out both large democratic votes in one fell swoop and promptly retired never to have to pay for a drink in a gay bar again. So much for the sanctity of “popular votes,” eh, Hillary?

Though I worried about the slippery slope this monumental redefinition of a bedrock institution represented, this was not an issue that was on the front burner with me. For most people, “fairness” resonates keenly. I knew heterosexuals who divorced before they could get out their thank you notes for wedding gifts, and gay couples together for forty years.

You would think that the gays and the progressives would still be popping champagne, but again, you would be wrong. The poor losers turned out to be even more vicious winners. They outed supporters of traditional marriage and hacked into databases and punished anyone who had dared to believe what Candidate Obama said he believed.

Since there is not a single argument for gay marriage – it’s about “equality”; it’s about simple fairness; it’s just about “who you love” — that cannot also be applied to two men and a woman or three women and a Siamese Cat, the precedent has been set and the erosion of the institution will continue apace. As Rush would say, “Don’t doubt me.”

And now comes the ludicrous obsession with the Trans-gendered. The “rights” of this minuscule population of gender-confused or fad-driven humans to use any bathroom du jour they choose are suddenly of paramount importance! And damn the bigots who object to their little girls being forced to share a bathroom with a man in a dress who likes to ogle little girls.

Try even to imagine what “letter” could come after the “T” in the Grand Pecking Order of Entitlement. Twenty years ago did you ever dream that the MILITARY (taxpayers) would be forced to pay for Brad the Gay Male Traitor to transform physically into Chelsea the Cause Celebre? If only Benedict Arnold had thought to call himself Bernice and demand free surgical alteration instead of alteration of the length of his neck.

So I return to my opening theme: It’s never enough; the Left will never cease adding categories of Entitled Victims, whose “rights” will supercede those of working people, normal people, religious people of any color, but for sure white people, especially white men.

Maybe, just maybe, once in a great while, there is a cost to forcing every degenerate or cockamamie policy down our throats.

Target president Brian Cornell, watching his cash flow in the opposite direction like the Bama football motto “Roll, Tide,” has now let it be known that when the Insane Corporate Decision was made, he was in the now infamous Target bathroom, or something. Maybe he said he was out of town, whatever. In any event, he is trying to weasel out of responsibility for a corporate decision right up there with New Coke or running Hillary again.

No big deal to these corporate elites with their Golden Parachutes and stock options and grotesque salaries to start with. Even if he loses his job, he won’t exactly be in the same shape as the victims of the “Woo-hoo! We’re Gonna Kill Coal” campaign, will he? As they say in Coal Country, the choices for their sons are “coal mine, moonshine (now meth and oxy), or walk on down the line.” Maybe if they agree to mine coal in a dress they will achieve protected status.

Responses

-->