Category Archives: Ideology

DEFINING LIBERALISM

A liberal Facebook friend posted a meme defining liberalism several weeks ago. This definition allegedly was from Webster’s Dictionary and stated the following: “1. Possessing or manifesting a free and generous heart, bountiful. 2. Appropriate and/or fitting for a broad and enlightened mind. 3. Free from narrowness, bigotry or bondage to authority or creed. II.a.1. Any person who advocates liberty of thought, speech, or action. “The liberal FB friend went on to comment that if this was defining liberalism, then she was proud to be a liberal.

definition-liberal-meme-facebook-mcclures-websters

My response back to her was as follows: “So, this is the dictionary definition of liberalism. The liberals I’ve been exposed to have anything but a free and generous heart. Their idea of helping those less fortunate is supporting mostly worthless government programs where the tax dollar goes up the ladder and then down the ladder where only 3 to 5 cents of that dollar actually makes it to the cause. A broad enlightened mine? Free from narrowness, bigotry or bondage to authority or creed? Don’t make me laugh. Liberals are the real racists, bigots, and hypocrites in today’s America. Any person who advocates liberty of thought, speech, or action. Again, don’t make me laugh. Liberals have been fighting free speech and free thought for decades. I don’t know one liberal, not one, who stands for the above.”

In researching the above, I happened upon another defining liberalism meme from The Federalist Papers that states the following:”1. Possessing or manifesting a free and generous heart with the earnings of others; very stingy with their own earnings. 2. Appropriate and/or fitting for a narrow and darkened mind. 3. Free or obligated to be narrow-minded, bigoted or bondage to unlawful authority or immoral creed. II.n 1. Any person who advocates anti-God/Life, pro-murdering, idiotic perversions, pro-tax redistribution of others wealth schemes, anti-American, anti-Family, pro-Marxist, pro-Communist propaganda and Big-Brother government.“

liberals-defined-750

Of course, the above definition was meant to be a spoof, but the meme is certainly defining liberalism in this, the second half of the second decade of the twenty-first century. It has been my observation that a typical liberal is most, if not all the above. Note: If former president Barack Obama can use the term, ‘typical white woman,’ I can use the term, ‘typical liberal.’

Liberals are not that generous, unless it is with someone else’s money. Statistics show that conservatives are more likely to donate to charitable causes and engage is hands-on community service than liberals. Until recently, I was a member of an international service organization. Within the United States, about ninety percent of the members of this organization were conservative/Republican. All liberals I know are extremely narrow-minded and bigoted, not open to new thoughts and ideas, only seeing things the way they want to see them. Furthermore, they have no tolerance for ideas, thoughts, philosophies, etc. unless those ideas, thoughts, and philosophies the same as their ideas, thoughts, and philosophies.

Most atheists and pro-abortion activists are liberal. In defining liberalism, the spoofy Federalist Papers indicates that liberals are ‘pro-murdering.’ Well, that’s not exactly true all the time. Liberals are for killing the unborn who have done nothing to anyone. On the flip-side, most liberals are against capital punishment, the putting to death of those who have destroyed other people’s lives.

Here is a quote by John F. Kennedy from the Good Reads website: “If by a ‘Liberal’ they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people—their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties—someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a ‘Liberal,’ then I’m proud to say I’m a ‘Liberal.’”

This, of course, took place over a generation ago and some of it’s not clear, but it’s certainly different from the dictionary definition quoted in the first paragraph of this article. I would probably be a liberal according to the JFK definition and so would most of my readers, I hope. We care about the welfare of the people, their health, housing, schools, jobs, civil rights, and civil liberties. Liberals say they care about these things, but we know differently. Liberals only want to control your lives…what you say, what you eat, what you drive, your thermostat setting in your house, etc. They think they know more about what’s best for you than you do.

I’m usually working in my office when Sean Hannity airs on Fox News, so I don’t often watch the show, except for snippets. During the last two weeks, though, I’ve watch the show in its entirety for the purpose of determining whether or not what liberals have been saying about his show, that it’s all about hate and vitriol with the segments coming only from far-right hate websites, is true.

Duh! Silly me! Do liberals ever tell the truth? Do they care about the truth? Do they care about facts? I’ve given you a few examples of liberalism defined. Still confused? Don’t be alarmed. It’s fact that liberals change the definition of racism to suit their needs of the moment and don’t hesitate to change it back if later, their needs change. They don’t know what they’re about. All they know is that they hate anyone who doesn’t agree with them and feel that it’s okay to destroy anyone who runs afoul of them, by any means necessary.

Facebooktwitter

UNLEASHED LIBERALS

Years and years ago, I heard Rush Limbaugh comment that liberals were the craziest when they were out of power.

Now that the left no longer has the presidency, the Congress, and hopefully soon, power will return to the right on the Supreme Court, we have unleashed liberals, saying anything to get attention, not caring if it is true or false.

I often use the term, “tolerant left.” I have even told some folks that I coined the term. Bill O’Reilly has used the term, but only after I used it. It’s no secret to anyone that liberals are the most tolerant and open-minded people on earth except when you don’t agree with them and where they stand on political issues. Then you are subject to ridicule and being called a moron, idiot, clueless, and a few other monikers which I won’t put in print.

A week ago, an interesting looking article appeared on my newsfeed. The headline read: Trump Takes Breather from White House, Hold Rally this Weekend

This article was shared by a liberal and contained comments by unleashed liberals. According to most news outlets, President Trump has worked every day since he’s been in office, but these unleashed liberals were accusing him of taking the weekends off. In fact, on this particular weekend, it was announced early on Friday (February 17, 2017) that after going to the Charleston Boeing plant for the unveiling of a new plane, that he would be spending a weekend working at Mar-a-Lago. The unleashed liberals claimed that he had already taken three vacations since becoming president. The unleashed liberals were also complaining about the so-called campaign rally that he was holding late Saturday afternoon, saying that he had better things to do with his time that attend a rally. One poster on another thread implied that the president only worked 9-5, five days a week.

The problems with these unleashed liberals, among other things, is they can’t seem to understand what they read. Ever since I’ve been commenting on liberal threads, I often must explain what I write two or three times to get a liberal to understand what I’m writing about. It makes me wonder if, to avoid admitting to being wrong, they’re attempting to change the subject.

When I commented, asking the participants on the thread, would they rather the president play golf or go on a date night like Obama was continuously doing, the comments were generally that he should be doing the country’s work, instead. One commenter even said there was no precedence for such a rally. Again, the unleashed liberals can’t comprehend what they read or hear. No precedence for such a rally? Does there have to be. Remember, Jimmy Carter started his presidency out with those fireside chats, a new thing in the era of television. Not since Franklin Roosevelt had that been done. I further pointed out to the unleashed liberals that Obama held multiple rallies when foisting Obamacare on the American people. They denied it, but, as usual, they were wrong. After one commenter kept insisting that he had better things with that two hours Saturday evening that to hold a rally, I got a little chippy and indicated that she should apply for the position of scheduling advisor.

These threads, whether they are conservative leaning or liberal leaning always get off subject. One commenter asked about FEMA aid for the New Orleans tornado victims and for the Oroville damn scenario in California. I had read where California Governor Moonbeam had an acknowledgement from President Trump that assistance was approved and on the way. While I never heard anything about FEMA assistance to New Orleans. If it had been delayed, we would have heard about it. You can “betcha” bottom dollar. Of course, one unleashed liberal whined because she thought President Trump should have said something about the disasters. Upon this, I informed her that during the Nashville, Tennessee flood of 2010, Obama never talked about it, nor did he visit the Nashville area. I then threw in the fact that after the generational tornado outbreak on April 27, 2011 where parts of the states of Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia were devastated by long-form violent tornadoes, the only thing Obama did was visit Tuscaloosa, Alabama a few weeks after the fact.

The thread got very contentions with a number of the commenters piling on me, which is nothing new. At one point, one of the commenters attacked me in way that I have never been attacked, even by the most hate-filled unleashed liberals. At first, I laughed and shook my head. But after several hours, I started thinking that this particular attack was way out of line. I responded to the commenter that his/her (couldn’t tell from first name if man or woman) comments may have crossed the line when it comes to appropriateness. I then asked this person to take the comments down. I wasn’t holding my breath that the comments would be removed, but in less than twenty-four hours, they were.

Before their gal lost the election, liberals were the real haters, racists, bigots, and liars. Plus, they’ve always had trouble with reading comprehension and don’t care about the truth. Get ready, this new wave of unleashed liberals is becoming their former selves on steroids.

Facebooktwitter

THE LIBERAL MINDSET

When George H. W. Bush ran for re-election against Arkansas Governor, Bill Clinton, in 1992, the fact that Bill Clinton was a draft dodger and Bush, the elder was a fighter pilot during World War II made no difference to the liberals. How could they applaud Bill Clinton and on the on the other side of the coin, condemn George W. Bush. What was the liberal mindset all about?

For his military obligation, George W. Bush served in both the Texas and Alabama Air National Guards. He never went to Viet Nam, even though the war was currently raging. Was he able to get lighter duty because he was a member of the revered Bush Family. During the time Bush, the younger, was serving in the Air National Guard, his father, George H. W. Bush was serving as the U.S. Representative from Texas’s seventh Congressional district, and later (1971 to 1973), as United States Ambassador to the United Nations.

Did the future President of the United States get preferential treatment? I don’t know, but I would say that it was a good possibility. During the late 1960s and early 1970s, the war was growing unpopular by the day and anyone who could possibly get out of serving did, using all contacts that they had at their disposal. It was what it was.

When George W. Bush decided to run for president and his less than ideal military service was made known, I said to myself, “Well the liberals won’t be able to upbraid Bush on his military service because their “boy,” Bill Clinton was an “out and out” draft dodger.

Little did I know that the left, with liberal journalist Dan Rather, would make documents from Bush’s military service available during his 2004 run for re-election. The documents were determined to be fakes, but the left continued to badger Bush for his military service. Once again, I just couldn’t grasp the liberal mindset.

After George W. Bush was elected president in 2000, I began to become aware of the disingenuousness of liberals. Seventeen years later, we’re seeing the same old disingenuousness, only more of it. They will accuse you of one thing, then do the same thing later and think nothing of it. When confronted, they change the subject in hopes of throwing you off track. When they’ve lost and they know it, they start hurling accusations at you such as racist, sexist, homophobe, etc.

When I’m discussing something whether it be face to face or online, I’m a stickler about staying on subject. Not saying that I’ve never veered off subject, I certainly have. But for the most part I make every effort to keep things on track.

As I indicated above, liberals often change the subject to throw you off. I sometimes wonder, though, if they’re consciously trying to throw you off track or if they are incapable of understanding what they read. Are they lacking in reading comprehension skills? Because they have the academics in their corner, they think they’re smarter than you and me. But are they? I say no.

AttackOnDisabledYouth

Earlier today, I shared the above meme. A you can see, it’s simply pointing out that the alleged attacks and torture of a white disabled youth by four blacks yelling “blank” Trump and “blank” white people, would have a different reaction by the “tolerant” left, including the Obama administration, and the mainstream media if this had been four whites attacking and torturing a black disabled youth while yelling “blank” Obama and “blank” white people. Cities across the country would be on fire, Obama would have had multiple press conferences, the victim and his family would be invited to the White House, and people would be screaming racism and hate crime.

While conservatives are calling this a hate crime and have indicated that the four perpetrators are racists, the outrage by the right pales in comparison with respect to the outrage that would have taken place by the left had the tables been turned. By now, there would be rioting in the streets, destroying property and injuring people. Black leaders including Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would have immediately weighed in and called for protests. The mainstream media would be reporting on this continuously.

Following my sharing of this meme, a friend, who claims to be a moderate, but I think he’s really a liberal pointed out that the perpetrators were immediately arrested and charged, and justice would be rendered. He also pointed out that President Obama had condemned the acts and seemed to insinuate that the right is always expressing a desire for a completed investigation before conclusions are made. While there was clear-cut evidence of the crime committed after the perpetrators had video-taped it and put it on social media, that was not the point of this meme and the person who commented on it possessed the same liberal mindset that you see day after day, sometimes hour after hour, didn’t seem to recognize that.

Because Donald Trump will be our next president, the liberals are planning all sorts of strategies to derail his presidency. Prominent Democrats, including Michael Moore and Robert Reich, are instructing the sheeple on how to react toward Trump supporters and the legislation that President-elect Trump and the Republican Congress. See my article: Challenges to Conservatism.

I’ve never seen such actions in my life as those coming from the left in the aftermath of Donald Trump’s election. We have “Trump Derangement Syndrome,” college students, also known as snowflakes, requesting safe spaces where they can go and grieve over the election, liberal celebrities promoting the boycotting of the inauguration, Americans being attacked in various ways because they supported Donald Trump, ad infinitum.

Can liberals not see through themselves? I shudder to think what would have been said and done to conservatives if they had acted in a similar manner. Supposed we had openly threated to thwart every piece of legislation Obama and the Democrat-controlled Congress tried to pass? Suppose we had called Barack Obama something comparable to the names that Trump supporters have been called by the left? First and foremost, we would have been called racists and accused of hating Obama because of his skin color. Plus, we would have been accused of other hateful things, and been the subject of much hate and vitriol emanating from the left.

Well, doesn’t the left do all of that now? Of course, and I don’t expect them to stop, and neither should you. I haven’t been able to figure out the liberal mindset and neither has anyone else. Will anyone?

Facebooktwitter

LIBERAL ADMISSION, THEY WON’T DEBATE

The following meme, from Liberal Identity, appeared on my Facebook newsfeed.

liberalIdentityPhoto

The creator of this meme indicated what he or she stood for as a liberal and even admitted to being one of those liberal elites.

There is one point, point eight, in which I agree. Safety nets are needed because we are a civilized country with our roots based on Judeo-Christian principles. As individuals, Jesus has instructed to help those who are less fortunate than we are. However, we should never become a nation that allows people to die in the streets from hunger, exposure, and/or disease. While I have been involved in debates between conservatives and liberals regarding just what kind of safety nets we should provide and can afford, I know of no conservative who is against any type of safety nets provided by the government.

Okay, fine, this liberal is admitting his or her beliefs and they are diametrically opposite to mine and to most who call themselves conservatives. Everyone has the right to their opinions and I’m certainly not going to belittle someone for expressing their views in the manner that the “tolerant” left does.

Eyeball down to the bottom of the meme where this liberal has indicated that he or she does not wish to debate these points, and that he or she will never change their view on these issues. Never say never, your views can change. While I’ve always leaned conservative, there was a time when I considered myself a moderate Republican. Not anymore, though.

It’s highly unusual, and many conservatives will back me up, to bring a liberal into a debate on the issues. They can’t win and they know it. So, instead, they hurl accusations of racism, homophobia, xenophobia, misogyny, and other stuff at you. They accuse you of hating the poor if you question the efficiency of an entitlement program. If you disagree with Barak Obama’s policies, you’re called a racist, even though you didn’t belittle the president because of his skin color. If you believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman, you’re a homophobe. If you believe in school choice and question anything related to the public schools and public school teachers, you are against education and hate teachers.

I used to think it was something about me that made liberals want to hurl insults at me. I soon, though, realized that it wasn’t me. Everyone who attempts to have a debate with a liberal on the issues has insults hurled at them. Many conservatives give up, and that’s unfortunate.

The “tolerant” left needs to be reminded constantly that there are different viewpoints out there. They also need to be reminded that debate, including freedom of speech and freedom of expression are rights of citizenship bestowed upon us by our creator and solidified in the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. Plus, the worse the names they can call you, the more classless they appear.

I’ve expressed my angst regarding liberals’ refusal to debate the issues, and preferring to make themselves even more unattractive with their insults. I started using the phrase, “tolerant” left months ago, being sarcastic, of course. Since I started using it in my writings, I have heard Bill O’Reilly use it a time or two. I wonder which one of us coined it first.

We didn’t learn anything new about liberals today. Instead, we now have it from the “horse’s mouth.” Liberals are admitting that they refuse to respect differing points of view, much less debate their points of view. It’s their way or the highway. Furthermore, they have indicated they prefer to live in a totalitarian state.

According to dictionary.com, liberal means the following:

  • Favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
  • Noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
  • Of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism, especially the freedom of the individual and governmental guarantees of individual rights and liberties.
  • Favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, especially as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
  • Favoring of permitting freedom of action, especially with respect to matters of personal belief of expression.

Liberals, you certainly don’t favor any of the above concepts. In fact, under your own liberal admission, you are certainly not advocates of progressive political reform. Your philosophy dates back to when the planet consisted of kingdoms, ruled by kings, chosen by divine right.

Maybe you need to change what you call yourselves.

Facebooktwitter

EXAMPLES OF LIBERALS BEING WRONG

The following are just a couple of examples of liberals being wrong.

Several months ago, I was reviewing my news feed on Facebook when a liberal FB friend authored a post regarding a Congressional vote on mandating that private companies give their employees a minimum of four weeks vacation. The Republican controlled Congress didn’t pass the bill and these liberals were having a field day doing what they do best, hooting and hollering to the top of their lungs about how horrible and uncaring the Congressional Republicans were. Congressmen were getting two months or more vacation and they didn’t want us, the little people to even get four weeks vacation.

WRONG! Congress was not voting on whether or not to give people working for private companies four weeks vacation. Congress was voting on whether or not to mandate that companies give employees at least four weeks vacation. These liberals were trying to make you think that the Republicans in Congress are against us little people getting four weeks of vacation.

Putting it simply, Republicans like those in Congress and like myself, feel that the amount of vacation that a company gives its employees should be left up to the company. Government shouldn’t be involved in this at all.

Needless to say, when I broke into the thread and explained this to these liberals, the discussion halted.

In 2015, an article was written on freelancechristianity.com entitled Republican Jesus…guarding ‘merica from the liberals. The main point of the article is that Republicans, a lot of whom claim to be Evangelical Christians, do not follow the teachings of Jesus.

Toward the end of the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus summarizes what following his examples requires: “I was hungry and you gave me something to eat. I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink. I was a stranger and you invited me in. I needed clothes and you clothed me. I was sick and you looked after me. I was in prison and you came to visit me…Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.”

According to the portrayal of Republican Jesus, Jesus said, “If they are hungry, cut benefits to programs that feed them. If they are sick, deny them healthcare. If they are strangers, deport them.”

Even though this article was at least a year old, I replied as follows: “Do you even know the difference between a Republican and a Democrat, a liberal and a conservative? I am a Republican and in the past, I have done extensive community service work, helping those less fortunate. Just because one is against a government program that purports to help the disadvantaged, doesn’t mean that person is against the poor, against the disabled, etc. I believe that I can best help those less fortunate through my hand to theirs, as opposed to tax dollars taken from me and going up the ladder and down the ladder with everyone taking their cut and only about three to five cents of every tax dollar actually getting to the cause. Unfortunately, this is what liberals will lead anyone that will follow them to believe and it’s wrong. In my political blog, I make an effort to clarify things, but it’s an uphill climb when I have to refute articles such as this one.”

What’s so disconcerting is the inability to reason with liberals and get them to quit making charges such as the above. If they want to argue the validity of government programs to help the poor versus helping the poor through service clubs, faith based initiatives and individuals opening up their wallets, then fine. Perhaps we can have a civilized discussion.

When you try to reason with liberals, your spoken words fall on deaf ears and your written words fall on blind eyes.  Many times they will reply to you with something way off base or try to change the subject hoping to somehow throw you off. When all else fails, they resort to hurling false accusations at you.

Liberals claims to be tolerant and open to diverse ideas. Yeah right! That’s the reason I often use the phrase, “tolerant left.” Maybe I should take steps to copyright it.

Facebooktwitter