Dear Friends,
It seems to me, reasonable people can have discourse, but unreasonable people cannot be reasoned with. This is why unreasonable people often try to appear reasonable, and others will bend over backward to be reasonable, they believe their being reasonable will give their voice more credence and make them more identifiable. That is what is called “optics.” Civilization itself is built upon reasonable people. People will even shun someone who is unreasonable. No place is optics more important, or so we are told, than in politics. Yet… the case of Hillary’s obvious crimes, along with Obama’s corruption of the DOJ, FBI, IRS and State Department for political purposes, compared to the handling of the Trump collusion hoax, shows that being reasonable only gives advantage in civilized society.
Being caught in a hoax makes a normal person ashamed but makes a psychopath angry. This is one way to tell if a child or an adult is a psychopath. Obviously, shame is a reasonable reaction to being caught in a lie, while anger is an unreasonable one. Yet, we see anger in the reaction of the progressive media, democrats in Congress and pundits at being caught in the Trump collusion hoax… they are livid! Rather than apologize they seek to increase their investigations of Trump! By any standard, this is extremely unreasonable behavior. So, being caught in a hoax doesn’t make progressives the least bit ashamed, it makes them mad as heck. Have you seen a single democrat, pundit, or “news” organization, apologize for feeding the American people a lie for the last two years? Is that reasonable?
Even when a progressive is caught in a heinous crime they go unpunished. Take for instance the Jessie Smollett hoax. While it was designed and intended to get innocent people killed and brutalized, he went entirely unpunished for it. Imagine for a moment if a white straight Christian had fabricated a hoax, intended to get, [fill in the blank] people, killed and brutalized, in the outrage that would follow? That person would be forever a villain. He or she would be elevated to Hitler’s status as a scoundrel. Christians of all races and white people the world over would demand that person be punished to the full extent of the law. Which would be a reasonable reaction. Yet we see in the reaction of the progressive faction, unreasonable lack of shame, and even pulling strings to get him set free!
Reasonable or unreasonable positions? On illegal immigration and boarder security, the progressives stand for open boarders, zero enforcement of immigration laws, sanctuary cities, allowing illegals to engage in identity theft with impunity, giving aliens the vote, as well as releasing violent criminals back onto the streets if it keeps them in the country. To these ends the democrats have shown themselves willing to harm veterans, shut down the government and activate violent mobs, ANTIFA, to terrorize their political foes. In the case of abortion, the democrat position is, to allow afterbirth abortion up to two years of age, allowing babies born alive to die of neglect, screaming on a cold table, selling baby parts and removing all medical safety practices from clinics. Are these reasonable positions?
Most people seek to at least appear reasonable but the progressive faction has no such aims. They revel in their unreasonableness. Their willingness to exploit power to create power, corrupt institutions to decrease their accountability, glee in lying to the American people, lack of self awareness and anger at being caught in their lies… all are the traits of psychopaths, in short, extremely unreasonable people. To the progressive faction, being unreasonable is a sign of strength, while being reasonable is a sign of weakness. They exploit our reasonableness to manipulate us. What I wonder though is, at what point will people become so repulsed by the unreasonableness, and shun the progressive faction… if not, then at what point does everyone become unreasonable, and civilization itself breaks down?
Sincerely,
John Pepin
