Tuesday, July 12, 2005

What It Takes To Be A Liberal

As some of you may know from my writings or from having attended one or more of my lectures, my central thesis -- my complete understanding -- of the way Modern Liberals "think", is that they don't.

Modern Liberal philosophy -- the dominant force within today's Democratic Party and the socialist nations of Europe -- is predicated on the rejection of rational thought. The Modern Liberal sees rational thought as too "tainted" by cultural influences to be of any value in coming to the truth about things. They believe that, no matter how carefully one examines the facts and evidence, one's own biases are such that any conclusion whatsoever -- any belief or value -- is worse than worthless, it is nothing short of an act of bigotry.

Anyone who disagrees with the Liberal -- that is anyone who is anything but utterly indiscriminate -- is not just "wrong" in their conclusions but to be hated for having made the effort. In order to overcome what they see as the entrenched bigotry, and justified in their own minds that their efforts are for the "greater good," there is no lie, smear or slander the Liberal won't engage in to convince the dolts and racists that the only reason they believe America superior to, say, Saddam Hussein's Iraq, is not because of America's freedoms and unique cultural heritage but only because they have been duped.

The objective of Modern Liberal discourse and education, then, isn't to collect the facts and evidence in order to come to the best possible conclusion for that conclusion is, to them, worthless. Instead the Modern Liberal starts with their conclusion -- that all things are the same and any difference is merely the result of cultural pressures (e.g. boys playing with guns and girls playing with dolls) -- and then works backwards to cherry-pick, spin and invent whatever is necessary to "prove" their preordained conclusion.

To uphold their preordained conclusion the leftist must employ the most twisted and tortured of conspiracy theories, the most fractured of "logic" and the degree of slander, hyperbole and distortion recognizable in Democrat Dick Durbin's comparisons of American soldiers to the Nazis, Liberal college professor Ward Churchill's smearing of the victims of 9/11 as all being "little Eichmans" and the downright lunacy found in an article in the Guardian by Gary Younge.

In the article Younge writes in defense of the terrorists. This should be no surprise. The Modern Liberal will ALWAYS work on behalf of the most evil and attack the most good in order to prove their written in stone creed that all things are the same.

From Younge's article:

"We know what took place (in London). A group of people, with no regard for law, order or our way of life, came to our city and trashed it. With scant regard for human life or political consequences, employing violence as their sole instrument of persuasion, they slaughtered innocent people indiscriminately. They left us feeling unified in our pain and resolute in our convictions, effectively creating a community where one previously did not exist. With the killers probably still at large there is no civil liberty so vital that some would not surrender it in pursuit of them and no punishment too harsh that some might not sanction if we found them.

The trouble is there is nothing in the last paragraph that could not just as easily be said from Falluja as it could from London."

It is hard to imagine that Younge is really this stupid. Surely he is not as he can put together several sentences in a row. The problem isn't stupidity it is the unwillingness and/or inability to discriminate between truth and fiction. The ONLY truth that matters to the leftist is that all things are the same. Anything that supports that "truth," no matter how clearly a lie, becomes the truth.

Anyone to whom fact and evidence are the cornerstones of intelligent conclusions easily sees through the literally insanity of the Liberal argument. Sadly the leftists have had such complete control of our education system and the mass media that they have succeeded in indoctrinating into their cult of indiscriminateness millions who are literally incapable -- in fact utterly disinterested -- in considering the merits of Mr. Younge's points as even the effort to do so would be an act of bigotry.

Let's take Younge's statement a point at a time.

>>>We know what took place. A group of people, with no regard for law, order or our way of life, came to our city and trashed it.>>>

"No regard for law"? The coalition forces have so much regard for law that in two years of war the best those who hack off people's heads (and their allies in the Democratic Party) can come up with for "law-breaking" is that four out of a million soliders put panties on terrorists' heads (and even then they were punished!) and that the air condition unit in an interrogation cell for those sworn to murder all infidels -- and caught on the battlefield trying to do so -- wasn't on full blast.

Is Mr. Younge truly so incapable of making thoughtful comparisons (and/or does he expect his readers to be) that he sees an exact parallel between those whose very leaders lop off the heads of innocent civilians and proudly display it on the internet and a couple of night guards putting panties on the heads of terrorists?

"(no regard for) our way of life"? Moslems themselves were hiding out in their own Mosques knowing that Americans had so much regard for their "way of life" that the coalition forces wouldn't fight them there.

Funny how even the terrorist enemy recognizes America's "regard for their way of life" but Liberals and Democrats do not.

"(they) came to our city and trashed it..."? Is it possible that Mr. Younge is not only unaware of the care and discretion used in the military campaigns of the coalition forces but that America and others are spending billions, risking their lives and succeeding in building an Iraq not only back to its pre-war levels but to a degree comparable to the West?

Does Younge really believe that after blowing up the subways in London the terrorists plan to write a check to have us rebuild it? Does he think "the check is in the mail" from the Islamics to rebuild the World Trade Center?

>>>>With scant regard for human life..."

Despite America's ability to quite literally wipe Iraq off the face of the Earth the death toll is miniscule by all historic comparisons, Americans repeatedly put themselves at risk rather than endanger civilians while American resources such as army hospitals were often used to nurse even the bad guys back to health.

Does Mr. Younge really find a comparison between this and the wanton mass murder of innocents that is the standard operating procedure of the Islamic fascists he so desperately seeks to defend and protect?

(In the same vain, does Dick Durbin really find a comparison between our soldiers and the Nazis?)

"...employing violence as their sole instrument of persuasion..."

Is Mr. Younge really so ignorant of recent history that he has forgotten the 18 United Nations resolutions, the negotiations with al Sadr and the free elections that were just held in Iraq?

"...they slaughtered innocent people indiscriminately..."

"Slaughtered"? "Indiscriminately"? With just a little critical thinking one would recognize that the "indiscriminate slaughter" is exactly what America stopped by overthrowing Saddam Hussein and that, if the Iraqi people, who know the realities best, agreed with these slanders the terrorists wouldn't be losing the war and wouldn't have to import their killers from Syria, Iran and elsewhere. The Iraqi people support America's efforts but the Democrat and the Liberal seek to undermine them.

"...They left us feeling unified in our pain and resolute in our convictions..."

This is true. But the "pain" they were feeling "unified" in was in finding the scores of mass graves with their sons and brothers and children in them that were created by Saddam Hussein and would still be being filled if the Democrats and the leftists had had their way.

The Iraqis ARE resolute in their convictions -- convictions that favor freedom and appreciate America and coalition efforts -- so resolute, in fact, that they took to the streets in numbers (percentage) higher than even Americans to vote for an American-inspired democracy even as these same leftists were falsely reporting that the streets were "too chaotic" to allow an election to be held at all.

"...effectively creating a community where one previously did not exist..."

Could this leftist really be arguing that Islamic terrorism didn't exist prior to last week's bombings in London or September 11th? Does he really not know that the Imams have been preaching violent Jihad in London for decades?

"...With the killers probably still at large there is no civil liberty so vital that some would not surrender it in pursuit of them and no punishment too harsh that some might not sanction if we found them."

"Some." It's the leftists' favorite word. By finding two people (after all, that's "some") who do something the leftist is able to demand that everyone be punished for it. Of course, in a population the size of America's or Great Britains you can find "some" who believe just about anything.

Is the problem that the British (and Americans) have been too tough on the terrorists or that we have been so ludicrously the opposite of Younge's "some" that the terrorists told us what they were going to do -- seek the mass murder of all infidels -- went about doing it and still the Democrat and the Liberal seeks to attack those who demand simply that our citizens be protected and the evil murderers be stopped.

"...The trouble is there is nothing in the last paragraph that could not just as easily be said from Falluja as it could from London."

This is why the Democrat and the Liberal are so dangerous. They literally cannot tell the difference between tyranny and freedom, terrorists and heroes, murder and liberation that puts an end to genocide.

With this insanity as the basis of their policies the Democrat and the Liberal -- from Dick Durbin to Gary Younge -- side always with evil over good and wrong over right and do so by employing the most twisted of logic, the most dishonest of arguments and the most hateful of slanders against America, our allies and the Western World in general.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good blog. In my way of thinking, Liberal is another word that is bastardized and given a new meaning for the elitist, socialist and communists to hide behind. Karl Marx and Chairman Mao would be overjoyed with the acceptance of political correctness and sensitivity. After WW2 stood the Strand House in London. Each hour, a floor would be vacated the customers would go onto the street and wait for another floor to open to enter, purchase cup tea for another hour of talk on any subject. Communism was accepted then. After-all the Russians helped defeat the fascist Hitler. How very intelligent these liberal people sounded but you know to this American they were dumb then and they are dumb now. Rawriter

NoTONoEagles said...

Help Mommy, there are Liberals! underneath my bed!!! (No, seriously, that's the name of the book...) Don't believe me? The dang thing's on Amazon, not some hippie-press bullcrap ;) Anyway, thought you might enjoy, pinko ;)