AL | 2006-09-27
Al knows better, but he gave me a chance to make a point here:
NOT SPAM
I think one has to first decide if he's a conservative or a revolutionary.
Bob is calling himself both. Is there no contradiction here?
I can understand why one would want to call himself a conservative and speak in ambiguous
terms about preserving European heritage. It brings the normal, mentally balanced people
that we desperately need into the movement. But I find it disingenous at best and deceitful
at worst. As if non-whites would leave if you gave them a plane ticket and a few dollars.
Yeah, right.
Comment by Al Parker
ME:
Al, language is usage. Today anyone who is not a stright-down-the-line Political
Correctness freak is called a "conservative." I did not invent the language, but I have to
play it where it lies, and this is a lie.
Nontheless, in our society every non-liberal is called some kind of conservative. If
you are anti-liberal you are a conservative, and in that sense I am a conservative.
If things were not so desperate, I would spend some effort in fighting for the
correct use of words. The William Buckleys have ample time to do that sore of thing.
I don't have that time preceisely because I AM a revolutionary.
To say, "I think one has to first decide if he's a conservative or a revolutionary." is one
of those statements one cannot deal with logically, like Reagan's "We came here to clean
out the swamp, not to join the alligators."
The word you apply to me is defeinitely NOT the first thing I am worried about.