Just contemplating today that liberals rarely make sense. One liberal point of view is that there should be light-rail trains and high speed trains everywhere in America, replacing cars, trucks, motorcycles and the like. But this idea would never work. The reason why? Other liberals would stop it. Yes, liberal environmentalists would find a gopher burrow, or a rare aphid colony--years of study would need to be done to figure out the environmental impact, new routes would need to be changed, involving more studies of the impact on the newly proposed routes, on and on and on. But wait a minute...it just might work. I nearly forgot that the environment can be overlooked as long as the liberal agenda is pushed forward. Just look at how many windmills around the country went up without a thought in the world about the displacement of kangaroo rats, jackrabbits, or horned toads.
Kind of like...
Liberals are in favor of equality. Take from the rich, redistribute to the poor. In favor of equalizing the money supply. In favor of taking from the haves and giving it to the have-nots. Yep, in favor of equality. So in order to get it, they'd like the rich to pay 30 percent or more of their income in taxes, and the less fortunate to pay next to nothing. How is that equal treatment under the law? So, as long as equality means what they define it to mean, then they believe in it.
Another thing is...
Work. Many liberals believe that traditionally low-income jobs, such as dishwashers, or parking lot attendants, should be getting paid a lot more, like twenty dollars an hour. I heard that from one of the Occupy Wall Streeters. And NBA players should be getting a lot less. The liberals want to take from the NBA players, and Oprah (wait a minute, Oprah is one of the rich that they don't want to take anything from because she agrees with them), and give that money to those on the low end of the financial scale. Sound like a nice concept, only can't we ask the wealthy to help the poor voluntarily? But it's not only that. Liberals would like those who refuse to work to be subsidized in their efforts by those who do the work. That's you and me. As Dennis Miller says, "I'm fine with helping the helpless. I just don't want to help the clueless." Equal work for equal pay, how about that? If you can play a sport well enough to draw thousands to watch you, employing hundreds if not thousands of other employees to sell snacks and beverages, show you to your seats, provide security--well if the job you are doing provides so many jobs for so many other people, maybe you might be worth a little more on the job market than the guy who stocks shelves at Wal-mart for a living.
3 comments:
There are one-dimensional thinkers on both sides of the political spectrum. As someone who thinks of himself as a liberal, I can assure you that I don't share these paradigms as you described them in this entry.
Noted. It was a generalization, but as a generalization, it's quite common place for the scenarios I described to be factual. But also, I think that's more people on the extreme left who believe most of those things, as a general rule. I too have some liberal tendencies, but would still describe myself as conservative generally.
I wish the comments had an "edit" button. Instead of "that's" I meant to say "that it's".
Post a Comment