Mercnbeth
Posts: 11766
Status: offline
|
The “Left”, the “Right”, and the “Pragmatic” quote:
NorthernGent: I joined here about a month ago and I assumed that the vast majority of people on here would lean towards the left. The reason being open mind, exploration etc - not just the lazy, narrow-minded, reactionary views on life. Implying that the “right” is the standard-bearer of closed minded, lazy, and reactionary? No-smoking laws or smoking tolerance in general; liberal left or closed minded right? Are entitlement programs generating hard working motivated citizens or lazy welfare collecting drains on society? Entitlement programs left or right wing inspired? Votes are counted and your party loses. Does the left or the right initiate a lawsuit regarding the matter? Everyone is aware of Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004. If you need a right side example, I direct you to the Washington State gubernatorial election. (Link:http://powerlineblog.com/archives/009083.php) There is not one liberal or left policy that doesn’t result in taking something from another group. Work hard for the things you desire in life and its not your success that’s used as an example to others but your excess is pointed to, mocked, and taxed. Liberals are the least freedom and liberty oriented than any other group. They really don’t want equality they want people to be “more equal”. Within their dogma is obvious prejudice. Any program or application process that gives black people, woman, or any group special consideration is in its nature prejudicial. Not to the majority, but to the very people it hopes to treat on equal footing. In reality it’s saying a black man or a woman or anyone given a “more equal” status isn’t capable of competing equally. Should white runners be given a 10 yard head start in the 100 Meter dash because they were brought up athletically deficient? But because the “intent” is to legislate equality we accept these programs. In liberalism, intent is enough to justify action. Consequence or long term impact shouldn’t bring criticism because after all, our “hearts” and our “intent” are good. The consequences of liberal policies; cross generation welfare, poor school systems, bloated government bureaucracy just indicate that we need more taxes, more entitlement, more government. We need to hold back the potential over achievers in our class rooms until the least among us catches up. Better to graduate a class of mediocrity than have 10% super achievers and 10% failure. We can’t allow anyone to fail. This brings to mind the other key aspect of liberalism. There is no debating the future or consequences with a left leaning liberal. They want to address issues and make amends for policies that are 140 years changed or talk about indigenous people 3,000 years removed; often ignoring treaties, consequences of war, or ancestral preference for migration. Liberals are quick to point of innocents hurt and killed while sunning themselves in the shade of rockets being launched over their heads across the border to a neighboring country but genocide by a religion and culture is ignored in Darfur. “Compassion and empathy” only seems to occur when the power in charge derives from the ‘right’ side of the issue. quote:
Today more than 2.5 million people are homeless, starving and constantly facing death, according to the Save Darfur Coalition, an alliance of faith-based, humanitarian and human rights organizations, which has a Web site at www.savedarfur.org. (Link: http://www.dailyrecord.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060804/MCTV/608040354/1004/LIFE) Would a brave liberal ever admit to leftist government or regime being corrupt? It there any evil worth fighting that is not “right wing”? Accepting and welcoming are not liberal attitudes. Neither is their any room from compromise or alternative views. You can lose your “liberal” card by disagreeing. Ostracism is swift if you don’t tow the entire liberal line. Need a case in point? Watch the Senate election in Connecticut. quote:
Lieberman, a three-term Senate veteran, has been pummeled by millionaire cable television executive Ned Lamont over Iraq and for his willingness to work with Republican President George W. Bush. He is behind by 13 percentage points among likely voters, the Quinnipiac University poll found. (Link: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2270980) Senator Hilary Clinton should be careful. Lieberman and she have the same voting record concerning Iraq. This is why once again in 2008 the choice from the Democratic side will lose. Every issue on the left is polarizing and exclusionary. They can tell why programs failed, why war was wrong, why more taxes are needed, why people shouldn’t own guns. But their voting records don’t live up to their convictions. Or they do not present a logical and macro solution. They can tell how it’s wrong. They can tell you why yesterday’s decision was wrong but aren’t so confident about the one they’d make tomorrow. As a result every fringe or minority group that they placate moves votes to their opposition. These fringe rallys are fun to attend and make for great TV but only serve to polorize and mobilize those against the fringe. They forget that fringe and minority groups are called that because they make up a minority or fringe factor. Need an example of how this works? California has a Republican governor who took steroids, fondles women, smokes cigars, and can’t pronounce the name of the state he governs; those are just his positive resume items. But the liberal Democratic opposition ran a candidate so far left to placate the fringe and minority groups that the high powered “right winger” Stephen Spielberg just came out backing Arnold. The same will happen in 2008 in the presidential election. And it’s why we’ll be subjected to laws and policies from the more radical right wing. The vote against the polarizing minority creates an anti-fringe voting majority. Unfortunately for us there isn’t an alternative. Unfortunately for us the ‘winners’ interpret their plurality as a mandate instead of recognizing it for what it is, a vote against the opposition not FOR conservative or right wing policies. Oh, and to answer the OP regarding “where I get my news”. The answer would be as long as this post. The short answer is everywhere, via every media; never trusting any source and avoiding those that I agree with 100%. I can’t learn anything from nodding in agreement.
|