'Muh Principles'

[Cripplecreek]

It's a phrase we hear over and over on Twitter whenever someone criticizes morally troubling anti-leftist tactics used by members of the right. They say: "What are you, some sort of coward? What, are you worried about muh principles?" The phrase is meant to deride the supposed moral preening of those who criticize -- they must think themselves high and mighty, whining about virtue where some good hard-nosed old-fashioned get-in-the-dirt-and-fight-'em tactics would do. Those worries about right and wrong just hamstring the right. "Muh principles" are a liability. Why can't those weaklings just get over their supposed moral purity and fight in the trenches?

Now, I'm no fan of political cowardice. I wrote an entire book called "Bullies," in which I blasted the left's character assassination techniques. I routinely speak on college campuses in conditions that are less than physically secure. I'm more than happy to tell people things they don't want to hear in political debate, and I've been threatened more than once for my trouble.

But I'm a fan of principles.

I'm a fan of principles because without them, politics becomes meaningless. Even those who criticize "muh principles" have their own principles. The "muh principles" crowd's highest principle is supposedly defeating the left. That is its entire argument: If you stick with your wishy-washy principles about civility, you'll lose! And if you lose, my principles will be destroyed!

But, as it turns out, many of those who mock "muh principles" have no actual principles other than empty tribal victory. Never was that clearer than this week when several of the self-appointed members of the Trump-ardent defense squad went full social justice warrior, invading a Shakespeare in the Park performance of "Julius Caesar" that depicts President Trump as Caesar. Screaming "Liberal hate kills!" they stormed the stage, called audience members Joseph Goebbels and held up the production. Those who objected to this obtuse behavior were simply being hamstrung by "muh principles," they then proclaimed.

More.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/17762/muh-principles-ben-shapiro

The Alinskyite ends justify the means thinking is an addiction that won't be easily broken if it ever is broken. I recognized the danger when some decided to use it against liberals and was not at all surprised the see it used against conservatives who don't support Trump.

"For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul?

[Silver Pines]

@Cripplecreek

Really good article from Shapiro.  We criticized that idiot actor from "Hamilton " who took it upon himself to lecture Mike Pence from the stage.  We can't cheer on morons who rush a stage because their snowflakiness has overwhelmed them.

[Cripplecreek]

@Cripplecreek

Really good article from Shapiro.  We criticized that idiot actor from "Hamilton " who took it upon himself to lecture Mike Pence from the stage.  We can't cheer on morons who rush a stage because their snowflakiness has overwhelmed them.

Making a buck off it was also behind it since they already had a domain name purchased for "Free Laura" with a website suggesting it would cost $25,000 to legally represent Laura Loomer.

[Silver Pines]

Making a buck off it was also behind it since they already had a domain name purchased for "Free Laura" with a website suggesting it would cost $25,000 to legally represent Laura Loomer.

Lol!  I'd be surprised, except I'm not.   

[EasyAce]

From the article:

I'm old enough to remember when the pro-Trump right justified Trump's behavior on the grounds that he
had to build a wall and rescind Obama's executive amnesty. Now, only Ann Coulter has the guts to point out that
Trump hasn't done either -- and that he just enshrined for all time Obama's executive amnesty. I'm old enough to
remember when the pro-Trump right assured conservatives that it would hold Trump to account if he were to fail
to repeal Obamacare. Now it's ignoring the fact that he called a watered-down Obamacare too "mean" and pushed
for a broader funding regime.

Where are their principles? I thought "muh principles" had to go so that they could achieve theirs. But they seem
rather blithe about the collapse of some of their supposed core precepts, which suggests that maybe there are
some on the right who just want to fight, and have forgotten why they fight -- and how to fight. All that matters
now is winning, even if they have no idea what winning looks like other than the other guy losing.

Where are their principles? Easy---they think "principles" are those meanies who ran their schools
and made them write 100 times "I will not set off firecrackers in the bathroom toilets" . . .

[INVAR]

But, as it turns out, many of those who mock "muh principles" have no actual principles other than empty tribal victory.

They only want payback, retribution, 'revenge' and to 'win'.  And winning means making Leftists cry and going into fits of rage and despair.

Limited government and personal liberty meanwhile? Irrelevant and no longer necessary.

It is about 'better managed" Socialism and "the win" as a trophy.

Liberty can pound sand apparently.

[Cripplecreek]

They only want payback, retribution, 'revenge' and to 'win'.  And winning means making Leftists cry and going into fits of rage and despair.

Limited government and personal liberty meanwhile? Irrelevant and no longer necessary.

It is about 'better managed" Socialism and "the win" as a trophy.

Liberty can pound sand apparently.

Alinsky knew exactly who he was representing when he dedicated his book to Satan and he knew exactly what he was doing when he pushed "Ends justify the means" thinking. Alinsky openly admitted that it was destructive and he didn't care.

I hope his newfound followers on the right will remember that the ends justify the means when their granddaughter turns tricks to pay the bills. After all, she has to keep the lights on somehow.

[Right_in_Virginia]

But, as it turns out, many of those who mock "muh principles" have no actual principles other than empty tribal victory.

If this is true, then those who cling to uncompromising political "principles" have no actual political principles other than repeated and complete defeat.