Paying in Blood for Liberal Arrogance
If there is one trait that defines Liberalism, it is a hatred for consequences. No matter what the circumstance, Liberals are either trying to ignore, avoid, or blame others for the consequences of their own actions. Normally this would not be a problem, everyone should be free to live as goofy a life as they please, even if it happens to entail stumbling about blindly within a fog of their own self-delusions. However, the problem with Liberals is they cannot just be content with screwing up their own lives; they have to screw up the lives of those around them as well.
If a woman runs around and has unprotected sex, Liberals think the child should be killed because it is unfair to make people live with the consequences of their lack of morality. If someone had a bad childhood and has an unnatural hatred for the cherished beliefs of others, Liberals feel we should ostracize Christianity from society so these misfits do not quite so poignantly feel the sting of missing out on Christmas. Illegal immigrants should be granted citizenship so they do not have to deal with the consequences of ignoring immigration law. Disabled loved ones should be euthanized because selfish family members do not want to deal with their care. And, homosexuals should be allowed to marry because they do not want to acknowledge that two beings of the same sex cannot breed.
Reality is the greatest threat to Liberalism, not Conservatives. When reality comes crashing in, and Liberals are forced to see the consequences of their half baked ideas, their first response is to blame someone else for them. Normally, the people who get blamed will be the ones who said their ideas would never work in the first place, but since the Libs hate them, they make a convenient scapegoat. That might sound like an oxymoron, blaming others who said your ideas would not work after they have been proved right and your ideas did not work, but it far easier for Liberals to lash out in overly emotional incoherence than admit they might have ever made a mistake.
So far, the only victims of Liberalism have been our society, culture, children, and way of life in general. However, this soon may change in the face of the international war on terror and nuclear proliferation.
If it was not bad enough that Liberals, headed up by Appeaser-in-Chief, Jimmy Carter, drafted the treaty that North Korea promptly ignored and developed nuclear weapons under, they are now complaining that the treaty did not work, and blaming Bush for it. Evidently, they do not feel that the United States has appeased the psychopath leader of North Korea quite enough, so off we go to the United Nations to learn the true meaning on international diplomatic incompetence. As we speak, the leaders of nations North Korea is not pointing nuclear missiles toward are deciding the fate of those who do. Perhaps, if we are lucky, the UN will get really tough with North Korea, and in addition to a press release expressing “regret” that North Korea is practicing its incineration of Tokyo, and order the United States to send 52 American hostages to Pyongyang to guarantee our good behavior.
Speaking of 52 American hostages, Iran, venue of President Carter’s last diplomatic victory for Liberalism’s cause, is going to develop nuclear weapons, as well. This time, the Bush Administration is doing what the Liberals want, and engaging in multilateral negotiations with a country that is the wellspring of global international terrorism. Not to be the pessimist, but they are not going to work. Iran is doing to pursue the development of nuclear weapons until either they have them, or someone destroys their nuclear production capabilities. We can stand around and negotiate forever, and this fact will not change. Liberals like to pretend that negotiations are an end unto themselves. That somehow, if we talk long enough, and give a hostile enemy concession after concession, peace will mysteriously erupt. The fact that negotiating with rogue regimes is no more effective today than it was in the days of Neville Chamberlain is lost on Liberals. Faced with the reality that the problem is not Iran’s poverty, infrastructure, or need for alternative fuel sources, but the radical terrorist regime running it, Liberals have once again chosen to blame Bush and the United States, in general, for objecting to Iran’s desire to “wipe Israel off the map.”
At no point have Liberals joined the threads of together and realized that we are doing the exact same thing with Iran that we did with North Korea. If there is ever a negotiated compromise to the current crisis, all it will do is give the Iranians a few years to secretly violate the treaty and then drop their fully developed nuclear capability on the world as a fiat accompli.
Liberals are not only ignoring the consequences of their previous decisions, but arrogantly proceeding down another reckless course that will only end in disaster. Just as “The New York Times” has decided there will be no negative consequences to their divulging America’s innermost secrets in how it fight the war on terror, simply because they have decided there will not be any, the international community is gambling that their failed methods of the past will somehow now work with Iran and North Korea. My question is, how many millions will have to die before the Liberals admit they were wrong.
Justin Darr is a freelance writer living in the Philadelphia area with his wife and twin children. He can be read widely on the Internet and in publications across North America and in Europe. www.justindarr.com
July 9th, 2006 at 4:59 pm
This is one of the best articles you have posted since I started reading CalCon! Seriously! With articles like this, who needs cereal boxes and comic books? Because that is all to which this piece could be compared. Except that, usually, cereal boxes don’t have poorly written, gramatically incorrect, and just plain stupid, broad, and sweeping generalizations.
No, its articles like this that make conservatives who they are, and help prove why, in so many ways, they’re wrong.
Conservatives think that women should be barefoot and pregnant, all the time. Just pump out babies like a vending machine dispenses jelly beans. But, of course, once their out of the womb, those babies are on their own! Health care? Day care? Liveable home life with just a few basic comforts, like a clean bed and healthy meals? No way, thats a wellfare state, and not on my dime, bucko!
Conservatives think that belief and spirituality solves everything. Don’t want to think about life’s quandaries? Write it all off to an unseen, all-knowing and all-powerful force. And don’t question anything. Here’s one for you, Mr. Darr: unplug your wiz-bang and otherworldy keyboard from your magic box, and keep typing away. I’m sure that your beliefs will transmit those electrons somewhere, where people who are more fitting to read your gems of wisdom will understand your rants.
Conservatives think that God will save them from themselves. Just look at the environment. Rape the land, cut down all the trees, suck all of the oil out of the ground, and when the air is no longer breathable, well, we’ll just invent some super-great purifiers that we can run. And if the oceans rise? Heck, we’ll just build a big seawall. God won’t let the waters rise up and kill us, unless we live in a chocolate city, or someplace where all those evil liberals live.
And conservatives believe hatred is a virtue. Conservativism used to be defined by personal responsibility and fiscal restraint, but that obviously didn’t work, so now we have hatred. Hatred for homosexuals is just the last great group that the conservatives can beat up on. I mean, who really cares about a bunch of silly fags? They’re not humans, and they don’t deserve to be treated with any respect, let alone, equality.
You know, conservatives just can’t seem to connect the threads that have been woven throughout history. When an idealogy rises up that is defined by arrogance, stupidity and hatred, it fails. The bad news is that we’re all going to suffer while the conservatives go about trying to destroy our way of life; the good news is that we’ll recover. The cycle has been repeated ad infinitum since the dawn of time billions of years ago.
I’d sure hate to be Justin Darr, knowing that one day I’ll have to face my maker, who’ll be standing there with this piece in hand.
July 10th, 2006 at 8:15 am
This article alone has just convinced me to stop reading this blog. What a waste.
July 10th, 2006 at 8:45 am
Very well written piece, and Mr. Darr is 100% correct in his analysis.
Democrats are engaged in a very dangerous game of national Russian roulette. The blanks are the empty rhetoric and posturing they fill their arsenal with. The bullet, however, is aimed firmly at the forehead of the American citizen and US national security. With every irresponsible statement, an enemy that would kill us again takes note and uses the verbal assassination to demoralize and discourage those brave enough to protect not only innocent Americans who “get it”, but the stupid ones who don’t.
Democrats claim to be just as patriotic as Americans who don’t burn the flag or display it upside down, but judging by their words and deeds they don’t seem to care beyond their own political power. They get high on power and its addictive influence and with every election lost become like heroine addicts needing another fix; lying, stealing, selling their own children for one more hit until they convince gullible people that they are actually good and caring. Then they can take back the Congress, the Senate and the White House, so for them its all worth it. Anything and anyone who stands in their way is fair game, means that justifies the end.
This is the ugly truth behind liberalism: any collateral damage is worth the price of political power and personal freedom over the good of all: whether the unborn, the soldier, Terri Schaivo, crime and punishment, assisted suicide or a weak national security, liberals worship their track record of being on the side of death. They wear it like a badge of honor.
If we don’t stop them, we all get what they deserve.
July 10th, 2006 at 8:46 am
“This is one of the best articles you have posted since I started reading CalCon! Seriously! With articles like this, who needs cereal boxes and comic books? Because that is all to which this piece could be compared. Except that, usually, cereal boxes don’t have poorly written, gramatically incorrect, and just plain stupid, broad, and sweeping generalizations.”
Stop Bush!: Please take your article to a valid English teacher (i.e. - generally, not one that has graduated from a state university in the last three decades) and have him/her redline it.
And while you’re at it, have that person explain that it is usually not a good idea to use stupid, broad, sweeping generalizations when attacking one for stupid, broad, sweeping generalizations.
July 10th, 2006 at 9:07 am
Looks like some buttons have been pushed! Obviously, a calm and loving person has responded with all accepting and open minded, kindness. A true liberal who embraces all points of view without judgment.
July 10th, 2006 at 9:53 am
“conservatives believe hatred is a virtue”? Can you prove such a statement? I seem to recall Al Gore calling republicans the extra chromosome party. Never heard a retraction or condemnation of that from the DNC. I could waste my time giving countless examples.
Speaking of history, you might want to refresh your knowledge. It is Republicans who abolished slavery, who supported the Civil Rights amendment of 1965 (while Dems opposed both). It was the Democratic party that started the KKK as a terrorist movement against blacks.
Democrats hold the monopoly on hatred, Mr. Stop Bush. History doesn’t lie: Democrats do.
July 10th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
“With articles like this, who needs cereal boxes and comic books? Because that is all to which this piece could be compared. Except that, usually, cereal boxes don’t have poorly written, gramatically incorrect, and just plain stupid, broad, and sweeping generalizations.”
I don’t know what article you just read, Bush hater, but this is a superb article. I understand your need to deflect attention from the content because OUCH, it hurts, doesn’t it?
Well, well done, Mr. Darr. You probably know the Internet can be brutal. This is how liberals on line act when they’re outsmarted and have no clever ideas to counter you with. Note, *yawn*, as usual, how the liberal Bush hater remains anonymous. For a party so full of virtue and substance, they sure do hide their identities. Reminds me of the home team crowd putting a paper bag over their heads. They, they love their team, but are ashamed to be identified as a supporter. That’s what you have going on here.
PS… Mr. Bush hater, when condescending to Mr Darr about his alleged “poorly written, gramatically incorrect” writing, you didn’t note that you misspelled gramatically. It should be grammatically.
July 10th, 2006 at 1:22 pm
PS… another irony: “Stop Bush”, according to his name, wishes to dishonor the will of the people via two Presidential elections. This is a differnce between libs and conservatives (which buttresses Mr. Darr’s point): we Republicans accepted 2 horrific Clinton terms. But now apparently this lib wants to Stop Bush from…… serving the American people because he’s a crybaby and wants his way? Lord, these libs think the world revolves around them.
July 10th, 2006 at 6:14 pm
Oh, amy, you are too much! I mispell one word and I’m as stupid as Darr? And because I don’t put my real name to these pieces, they are somehow less valid? Then why do you put so much time into responding to me? And moreover, why do you twist facts and distort the truth… oh yeah, you’re a CONservative. (In case you haven’t read my other postings, I think you should all be called CON men, because you’ve convinced a minority of people to shout, scream, jump up and down, steal elections, take oxy-contin and viagra, all in the name of destroying the country.)
Besides, if I revealed my identity, nobody here would believe me, anyway.
PS. Bush didn’t win either election, no matter how hard you want to believe it. He lost in Florida in 2000, and facts are emerging suggesting that he didn’t win Ohio in 2004. One day, when honor is restored to the US, the Truth will be revealed. But only if the Earth isn’t a smoldering, burned-out hull by then, what with all the nuclear proliferation, rogue states, and unrest wrought by this illegitimate administration.
July 10th, 2006 at 10:03 pm
No, anti-Bush, you’re stupider than Darr. If you’re going to criticize his grammatical mistakes (of which there are none), you shouldn’t make them yourself.
Bush didn’t win either election? Good God. I guess God just really wanted him to be President. HOOAH.
July 10th, 2006 at 11:01 pm
If I’m so stupid, how come I didn’t have to go back nearly 200 years to find the last time a “republican” president did something worthwhile? I put republican in quotes, because Lincoln was a republican in the great democratic tradition. I know this is hard for you to understand, Amy, but the parties have evolved since Lincoln’s time, and now actually seem to most closely resemble what each-other looked like in Lincoln’s day. The north-eastern republican influence is what convinced Lincoln to work for Abolition — and I think everybody can see that the northeast is Democratic-leaning when you fast-forward a couple hundred years. So, what you’re really saying is that the party that eventually became the Democrats supported Abolition.
Gosh, Amy, I thought it was called the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and it was the work of John F. Kennedy (Amy, he was a Democrat), and was signed by Lyndon Johnson (Amy, another Democrat). Contrary to your erroneous assertion, the Act was saved by Johnson working with Hubert Humphrey (Hello Amy? another Democrat) and Senate Minority Leader Everett Dirksen of Illinois, who convinced Republicans to support the bill. Here’s a brief primer so that you can hopefully get your facts… oh, forget it. You’d actually have to read and think at the same time.
Oh, to was poetic over a time when politicians did the right thing.
Nevertheless, thanks for the opportunity to show once again how CONservatives like to twist the truth, distort the facts, and if all else fails, just lie.
July 11th, 2006 at 7:35 pm
You, Stop Bush!, of all people should know that lying is a basic skill of the unhinged left. Every (I believe) post of your’s I’ve ever read is full of distortions, twisted rhetoric and outright lies.
It was not the “single” mispeliing that was so bad about your first comment, it was the utter lack of any sensical punctuation that was so outrageous.
And it’s been only in the last 55-60 years that the donkeys have started taking off their white hoods, not since Honest Abe’s days.
Which brings up my last point: Since when was the Republican Party around two centuries ago? Last I heard, it was nearly the middle of the fifth decade of the eighteenth century, not nearly 200 years. This “fact” is as close as you come to the truth in your whole first comment.
June 20th, 2010 at 3:20 pm
I was incredibly pleased to acquire this site.I wanted to thank you for this great learn!! I unquestionably enjoying every single little bit of it and I’ve you bookmarked to verify out new stuff you publish.
August 23rd, 2010 at 1:32 am
I’ve been considering the exact exact same point myself lately. Glad to see somebody around the same wavelength! Great document.
August 23rd, 2010 at 11:44 am
I assumed it was intending being some unexciting old report, nevertheless it genuinely compensated for my time. I most unquestionably will article a link to this submit on my internet site. I am convinced my visitors are likely to locate that very valuable.
August 23rd, 2010 at 12:14 pm
Loved to view your blog page. I would love to suggest you that potential customers display many people look over blogs on Mondays. So it should encourage bloggers to compose new write ups above the weekend primarily.