INSIDE THE LIBERAL MIND

In reading the posts on Ruffy Huffy Ho, the Gunny came across a real doozy that deserved its own essay.

jamjam: "It may be his fault. It could be the Republican­s. Truthfully­, it doesn't matter whose fault it is - only that we PREVENT the country from being handed back to a Republican White House. I go back to the issue of federal appointmen­ts: Republican­s want to win the 2012 election. The right-wing will use Congress and the Senate to legislate their 'small-gov­ernment' agenda (i.e do as little as possible for as long as possible). The real danger is a Republican presidency­: that's when their social agenda is ruled on by conservati­ve judges, who they appoint precisely to make favorable rulings on religion, abortion rights, welfare reform, gun ownership, and so on. Federal judges are totally immune to public opinion. So even if the Republican­s ran on a libertaria­n platform, their conservati­ve judicial appointmen­ts would damage the fabric of the country even further than was done in eight years of Bush.

We CANNOT accept more Citizens United rulings. We CANNOT accept the danger of fundamenta­l changes to abortion access. We CANNOT accept the eradicatio­n of the boundary between Church and State. We CANNOT accept rulings allowing more money, more lobbyist control, and more corporate ownership of our system of government­. If it means we hold our noses, vote for a less than perfect Democrat, so be it: what we win is a less publicised­, but more important fight."
---------------------------------------------------------------
How in the Hell could you even debate someone so absolutely stupid? So absolutely ignorant (and it appears blissfully so) of what Conservatism really means.

Take the first highlighted comment for example: "The right-wing will use Congress and the Senate to legislate their 'small-gov­ernment' agenda (i.e do as little as possible for as long as possible)."

To a liberal, government is God. The State is everything. Therefore, the State cannot be starved for it would be morally wrong! Take for example, the death tax. Liberals LOVE the Death Tax for it gets them money that has already been taxed two times, three times, a dozen times, so get it one last time! In fact, Megan Kelly was debating some dumbass liberal who called an inheritance, "unearned income!"  Really? The dead person EARNED this money, set it aside, saved it, invested it, etc, and probably wanted to pass it on to their heirs. In comes the BIG government loving liberals (Obama's budget for FY 11 sets it at 35%, 55% for estates over 1M) who seize this money to pay for their massive social programs like three YEARS of unemployment checks! How is this fair? In a nutshell, it isn't. The government has been taxing this money over and over and over and now gets one more bite of the apple? Bullshit.

A small government agenda includes a free market that determines prices, wages, etc. It includes an embrace of strong civil liberties and individual freedoms. It embraces a freedom of trade, intrastate, interstate, and transnational. It embraces a government that abides by the Constitution as it was written. A small government agenda is one where the government stays the hell out of the way and lets the economy and the people do their thing. Imagine that you run a marathon with regular running garb on, how would you fare? Imagine that you're running that same marathon encumbered by fifty pounds of chains, how do you fare? THAT, my friends, is the difference between small government and liberalism.

The dumbass liberal who posted the above crapulence simply cannot grasp the fact that it is not the government's job to provide a retirement plan, an unemployment plan, welfare, medicare, free medical, free this, free that, at the expense of some other citizen(s)? Because what the government gives to someone, they have taken from someone else. When one considers that American citizens actually did well on their own before the liberals began to "help them" it appears that liberalism hurts more than it helps. In fact, a small government teaches its citizens self-reliance whereas liberalism and big government turns its citizens into slaves and beggars, scrambling for crumbs from the liberal's table instead of owning their own loaf of bread!

In the second highlighted verbiage: "they appoint precisely to make favorable rulings on religion, abortion rights, welfare reform, gun ownership, and so on."

How can a judge rule "favorably" on say, the gun ban in Washington DC? The liberals enforced a ban on legitimate citizens owning firearms while the criminals were free to own them for this is the direct result of a gun ban. The Second Amendment, as read from the Constitution, is quite clear:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

So in reading that, it is clear that since the Law of the Land IS the US Constitution, the DC gun ban was clearly wrong for it infringed on the citizens right not only to keep and bear arms but it also violated the natural law from time immemorial, that a human being has the right of self-defense and defense of others, i.e., a man and his family. Consider the elderly woman who had her guns forcibly taken by cops (as she was thrown against the wall and pinned there) after Katrina, and who was robbed at gun point by looters two days later. Was this not in direct violation of the Constitution? Indeed it was. She was deprived of her protection, even as they violated her 4th Amendment right. (Had this been the Gunny's mother, those cops would have fed some gators, bet on it.) So a "favorable" ruling means that the Second Amendment is followed to the letter, how is this wrong?

In regards to the "religion" issue mentioned by the lib, it is apparent that liberals are clueless to the fact that states in Early America HAD designated state religions! And that if you did not agree with that religion, you moved to a state that you wanted to. This was the great experiment at work. The separation of church and state is NOT mentioned ANYWHERE in the Constitution but it IS mentioned in a letter from Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist Association in 1802. Once again, the ignorance of liberals and liberalism raises its ugly head.

In regards to abortion rights, it has been stated that Roe v Wade is bad law. If it is bad law, should it be enforced or negated? If the government passes a law that all Japanese-Americans should be thrown into concentration camps, wait, FDR already did that one. Where in the Constitution does it state that abortion is a right? If the TSA grope and grab is a violation of our 4th Amendment right, is not abortion even more so? It was Justice Harry Blackmun who could not find anything in the Constitution that would "legalize" abortion so he created one, that the woman's right to an abortion was her right to privacy. If the above is true, then the Gunny has a right to privacy in getting on an airplane so anything in the Gunny's briefcase is also private. It should not be inspected. Right? Now the Gunny, as a Conservative, doesn't give a damn if liberal women abort their kids, but he damn sure doesn't want his taxes PAYING FOR IT! THAT is the difference between us and them. They want US to pay for, as Obama put it, "a mistake."

Welfare reform. Liberals LOVE welfare as it makes them feel good to give money for nothing. The message to the "slaves" is that one can get money for doing nothing! Indeed, morally
speaking, the government steals money from a working man in order to support one who doesn't work! At the core of this fetid practice is that the problem does not get solved, i.e., getting a welfarite to have marketable skills and that they never get into work force. In the local community, those in need GET HELP and if they TRY to get over their problems, it is not an issue but those who take and take and thus, abuse the generosity of others, they should starve. But with the federal government running the show, when you NEED help, they're AWOL but the lazy and stupid get help forever, at the expense of others.

Thus welfare reform, of a system run by distant bureaucrats, who have no incentive or "buy-in" to exercise oversight of OUR money, is a good thing. To a bureaucrat, the more money they "spend" on the imagined needs of the welfarites, equals a lifetime job for them! Thus they continue to support a bloated government, that robs Peter to pay Paul and thus, get Paul's vote. Welfare enslaves all of us, those who work are slaves to having our paychecks pillaged and the recipients are slaves to a check for doing nothing.

So once again, we can see that liberals have no idea what a smaller government IS, how it HELPS us, and why America was better when the government was smaller.

 

www.usccb.org/prolife/issues/abortion/roevwade/RoeVWadeBI.pdf