Thursday, November 17, 2005

A Catalogue of Commentators - Issue 3. Dennis Prager


This is Durango; I'm an old timey cowpoke who's a bit touched in the head. Doc reckons I'm part singing cowboy and part squintin' cowboy. Anyway I'm just in from El Secundo. It's been hard dusty trail, and our commentator this week has me riled up. This polecats name is the Dennis Prager and he's in favor of
a second Civil War.
Whatever your politics, you have to be oblivious to reality to deny that America today is torn by ideological divisions as deep as those of the Civil War era. We are, in fact, in the midst of the Second American Civil War.

Of course, one obvious difference between the two is that this Second Civil War is (thus far) non-violent. On the other hand, there is probably more hatred between the opposing sides today than there was during the First Civil War.
I lived through the first Civil War. It's part of what made me the coldblooded snake that I am now. I stay out on the trails because being around other people makes me itchy. I don't know why Prager would root for a second civil war; even if he thinks his side could win.

People need to learn how to get along. Like when we built a chapel for Edwardstown. I got all the ranchers and farmers together, and started singing; soon the feeling of love and happiness filled their heart, and they all wanted to work together. But Dennis Prager seems like the sort of fellow that just enjoys squabbling. I guess it's cause he sees people who disagree with him as the enemy.
America is engaged in two wars for the survival of its civilization. The war over same-sex marriage and the war against Islamic totalitarianism are actually two fronts in the same war -- a war for the preservation of the unique American creation known as Judeo-Christian civilization.

One enemy is religious extremism. The other is secular extremism.

One enemy is led from abroad. The other is directed from home.
The thing Mr. Prager doesn't seem to understand is that we are can all work together to build up our towns and villages. Yeah there are bad guys out there, but equating people who live near you and think a bit different with the enemy, well it just riles people up. I wouldn't be surprised if people who take Prager seriously don't show their following of him in inappropriate ways.

No, that wouldn't surprise me one damn bit. Once you encourage people to hate; you can't get made if they then act out their hatreds. Course Prager isn't focused 100% on building up hatred between Americans. Sometimes he writes about the fairer sex as well. He wrote an article about why married woman vote conservative.
One [reason married woman vote Republican] is that women's nature yearns for male protection. This is a heretical idea among the well educated whose education is largely devoted to denying the facts of life. But it is a fact of life that can easily be proven: Extremely wealthy women almost always seek to marry men who are even wealthier than they are. Actress Jane Fonda had more money than almost anyone in America, yet she married Ted Turner, a man who had even more money than she. Though fabulously wealthy and a feminist, Ms. Fonda nevertheless could not shed her female nature.
I don't know whether Mr. Prager is right; I don't spend much time around woman. Perhaps some filly's have an opinion they'd like to express?

Mr. Prager is a talk show host as well as being a commentator. He apparently broadcasts out of Los Angeles. He's apparently a Jewish feller, and goes around talking about his faith.

Bryant has some comments about Prager too.
Prager is one of those guys who people should pay more attention too. He doesn't use the same kind of inflammatory tone as a Coulter or a Rush Limbaugh; but the content of his articles is very specifically a call to war. He describes Liberals as the enemy in exactly the same tone as he uses to describe our enemies in the "war on terror." We all know what Conservatives want to do with their enemies in the war on terror; so one can easily wonder what Prager wants to do to "America's Enemies" in the war on Liberalism. It goes without saying that I think Pragers work is a greater betrayal of the principles of America than almost anything the left has done.
Anyway here's a few previous commentaries on Mr. Prager's work.

On October 15, 2003, Bryant responded to Dennis Prager's thoughts on the second civil war. Apparently it riled Bryant up too.

March 22, 2005, Bryant responded to a theory of Prager's that we build up a moral bank account. If we generally do good, than we should be forgiven for our lapses.

On July 12, 2005, Cheery wrote an angry article (I don't get the impression that lady has much practice at getting angry), responding to Prager's assertion that Liberals do not support the troops.

Well I'm to ride into the sunset; just remember to keep singing and the sun will shine down on you.

No comments: