Gentlemen, Start Your Equivocations!
<a href=www.americandaily.com> The American Daily By Edward Daley on Thu Apr 17, 2003 6:09 pm
Well, the list of Democratic Presidential candidates is beginning to swell heartily now with the fairly recent inclusion of individuals such as Joe Lieberman and John Edwards, and as I watch these leftist hopefuls maneuver for breathing room within the pack, I am reminded of just how useless most of them have been to us over the years. I won't go into all the particulars at this time, suffice it to say that trying to enumerate what each of these people has done (or failed to do) while in elected office would take weeks to accomplish and fill up hundreds of single-spaced, typed pages. Frankly, I don't think I have a strong enough constitution to subject myself to that sort of hell. I mean, who really wants to think that much about liberals after all? I will say though that not one of these Democratic leaders has the wherewithal to run a wiener stand effectively, let alone the country, yet that won't stop them from seeking the highest office in the land. Soon these close political allies will be attempting to bump each other off, metaphorically speaking, using any means necessary, as they hop on their respective stumps and lie their asses off to the American people for the next 19 months or so. This should be as troubling to you as it is to me, and it's because I do indeed cringe at the very thought of one of these babbling fools possibly becoming President of the United States that I have decided to take a good look at their party, and pick apart a few of the policies which they all have in common.
Let me start by saying that the vast majority of modern American liberal voters have been so brainwashed by the these primarily socialist politicians that they are completely ignorant with regard to the manner in which a Capitalist society is supposed to work. They lack any real education in economics and are, consequently, not aware of the fact that they themselves are embracing socialism. Even if they were able to grasp that concept, they likely would not be cognizant of the dangers to our society which socialism represents, because they are as deficient in knowledge of world history as they are rational instruction in practically all other disciplines. Most of them cannot articulate intelligently why they believe what they do, yet they emotionally proclaim their views to be superior to those which are demonstratively more sound in nearly every respect. They promote feel-good policies which, more often than not, prove to be counter productive to the very aims to which they aspire; aims not entirely dissimilar to the aims of conservatives, by the way.
After all, every American, indeed, every human being wants clean air and water, abundant resources, equal opportunity, effective education for their children, better jobs, true justice, etc.. Yet the people of the left believe that they can micro manage the country into some sort of ideated utopia using the oppressive power of government to achieve their goals. Conservatives realize that such an idea is utter fantasy at best and dangerously authoritarian at worst. They would rather just work hard to achieve a better life for themselves and their families, and their idea of utopia is being left the hell alone by the government as much as possible.
Here are just a few examples of how liberals, after being prompted by people like Al Sharpton and Dick Gephardt, approach America's problems and the solutions they've devised. The left's idea of saving the environment, for instance, is to prohibit people from utilizing natural resources as much as possible. Of course, anyone with any intelligence at all understands that exploiting a certain amount of those resources is essential to keeping a balance in nature while avoiding economic catastrophe. Just consider the way these do-gooders have tried to "save the forests" in the western US over the past decade. They did everything in their power to stop logging in states like California and Colorado. They were successful to the point of preventing people from clearing out dangerous overgrowth and putting fire roads into place. The result was a rash of unmanageable forest fires which destroyed more trees in one year than loggers could have cut down (and used productively) in a century!
Furthermore, they have attempted to prevent potentially harmful oil spills caused by US companies drilling in places like the frozen tundra of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, by banning any procurement there altogether. This, of course, has forced the US to buy more oil from other countries, such as Mexico and Venezuela, which do not adhere to our standards of environmental protection during drilling and transportation operations, actually increasing the likelihood of damage to the environment and hindering America's ability to become less dependent upon other nations for oil (it's potential enemies included) at the same time.
The liberal method of promoting equality among the races is bizarre to say the least, because it involves embracing the most divisive policies imaginable. These people actually believe that the best way to get to a "color blind" society is to effectuate different employment and educational standards for people based solely upon their race! They are the first to state that we need to have constant "dialogue" with regard to ethnicity, yet they do not explain how focussing on our differences at every turn will ever lead to the sort of racial equality they say they want. Clearly, if all people do is endlessly preach about ethnic divergences and are only considerate of others based upon their skin color, they can never be color blind! It's a completely self-defeating strategy.
Liberals also espouse the idea of wealth redistribution by the government. They fail utterly to take into consideration certain basic economic truths. One is that it's not the government's money! The second is that the government is incapable of creating economic productivity through taxation. The money which people make and spend on goods and services is what fuels an economy, not the money that the government takes in. The third thing is that the government runs deficits because it spends more money than it receives in revenues. Since raising taxes can only be injurious to the economy, because doing so takes money out of the hands of the people who make the economy work, cutting spending on unnecessary government projects, as well as reducing the amount of waste inherent in governmental activity, is the only effective way to balance a budget without causing a recession. The forth and final economic truth which is always overlooked by liberals is that lowering taxes actually increases revenues to the government over time. That has proven to be the case every time it's been tried in modern history, and there's no reason to believe it won't continue to happen in the future! Instead of looking at tax cuts for what they are, which is an investment in our economy, these uneducated twits constantly refer to them as a liability!
Their idea of dealing with vicious dictators is to placate them by giving them whatever they ask for. Liberals make deal after deal with tyrants the world over, yet the only way they can see to handle these two-bit thugs when they break those agreements is to offer them more deals and hope they eventually decide to play nice! This policy of appeasement so readily adopted by people like Jimmy Carter and Jaques Chirac is absolutely ludicrous. It is the primary reason we find ourselves faced with a nuclear North Korea and a Syrian regime which is one of the most virulent terrorist supporting governments on the planet. How ironic is it that these leftist pacifists seem to be just fine with megalomaniacs possessing weapons of mass murder, but are absolutely outraged at the idea of peaceful American citizens owning handguns?
The list of these chronically ill conceived and often detrimental policies goes on and on, yet no liberal I know, be they elected representatives or working-class constituents, can explain to me in any reasonable way why they insist upon clinging to such socialistic and/or defeatist ideas; ideas which run contrary to all historical evidence and, in most cases, basic common sense. Their propaganda is as ceaseless as it is foolish, and it is reiterated in lemming-like fashion by the most dimwitted people this country produces. A collection of Marxist politicians who call themselves Democrats sets the agenda, their cronies in the news media repeat it ad nauseam, and the liberal masses follow it religiously. Liberal voters parrot the talking points of their often condescending and hypocritical leaders without question and then characterize anyone who disagrees with them as being a "right-wing fanatic" or worse. They tend to regard pragmatic conservatives as extremists, moderates as conservatives and themselves as mainstream, in spite of the fact that the ideas which they promote are not readily accepted by the majority of Americans.
Perhaps liberalism is, as I have heard radio personality Michael Savage hypothesize on more than one occasion, a mental disorder. And no, that isn't meant to be droll or foment resentment in people. I really wonder! As I look at the names of the people currently running for President on the Democratic ticket, I am hesitant to guess which one of them may turn out to be the 2004 front-runner. Does it really matter? Aren't they all basically the same animal, repeating nearly identical anti-American phrases and promoting the same cookie-cutter, socialist agenda? Who among them will be able to honestly point at any other one of them and state that their fellow liberal is trying to do something potentially damaging to our society which they themselves aren't trying to do, or haven't done in the past? I certainly can't answer that questions, but I will tell you this, I thank God every day that we have a fairly conservative Republican in the White House at this particular time in history. Just thinking about the alternative is more frightening to me than any terrorist could be.