Reply #12: Which is it? "confusion" [View All]

You bagged it. The author is confused and he transmits confusion.
He is trying to sound intellectual, to fog like an octapus the
puritain playbook that underwrites the neocon adgenda, by accusing
us of being "something". But since that is wholly innacurate, it
just comes off as confusing and banal.

The lesson, IMO, of this article is that they are blind towards
thinking their opposition is united by an ideological church, when
in fact they are looking in the mirror. This blindness might be
turned very effectively towards our advantage, as if we operate
outside of the rules of the church, we should win.

They goaded this church to defend gay marriage, as it is anathema
to their mind and cult book. Kerry stood for civil unions which i
beieve is a sensical position for a secular party that supports
equal rights for all persons. But they tarred us with the brush
of the most ideological zealots amongst us, to have us appear as
bent on destroying them as they are of us. Its like the japanese
propagandists during WW2 who told their soldiers to committ suicide
rather than be caught and tortured by those evil gaijin's. (back
when the army did not stand for the abuses it does today. /sad irony)