Sunday, January 16, 2011

Progressives Attempt to Ban Metaphors

Free0352 from over at John Galt for President wrote another article which I thought was brilliant and thus had to share.  I was mulling over the same ideas for a posting of my own but his posting was so well done, as typical, that I didn't want to waste my time even trying to do better.  You can read Free's often unique and insightful takes on current issues at his blog, John Galt for President

Freak'n stupid, Progressives attempt to ban Metaphors

After the shooting in Arizona last week, we can all agree that we've got to pass Obama's agenda immediately and stop using metaphors.

At least I think that's what the mainstream media is trying to tell me. But it also told me I hate black people because I think we as a nation should pay off our debt and balance our budget, so what do they know?

This whole exercise in feigned outrage is just another case study in a long tradition of Progressive Nannyism. Hitler had Nazism, Progressives have Nannyism.

Ask a Liberal- "When the DNC puts up a map for you to donate money with on it's web site that has targets on it, do you get confused and think you're being instructed to shoot people?"

They of course answer no. It's not "they" that need protection from themselves, it's "the other" and by that they mean us. Protection of course is code for denial of our rights to speech. All their nanny laws, from smoking bans, gun bans, alcohol bans, drug bans, salt bans, fatty food bans.... it's all part of the design to seize more control. The motive is for most of them is perfectly benign. Liberal crusaders always need a cause, and the cause seems to always be protecting people from themselves. In this case, protecting Americans from "mean people."

This as always leads to the question of responsibility? Whose responsible for the lung cancer? The cigarette company or the smoker? Whose responsible for this shooting? Is it liberals like Daily Kos and his little map or Sarah Palin and her map?

The answer is neither. The answer is Jared Loughner.

Liberal journalists often get who they should hold responsible staggeringly wrong.

I mean really wrong.

That's why you shouldn't listen to them, not because of hate filled rhetoric. Uber leftist blog Daily Kos attempted to reverse this point on it's site, saying quite breathlessly that since Republicans blamed Marilyn Manson for the Columbine killings (Which was the other way around, truth being Liberal Clinton officials came up with that one) they should take responsibility for the Tuscon shooting. What was the point of this blog post? I wanted to ask Kos, "What side of this are you on?" But there seems to be no side. The post reveals a total absence of principles, and so he and I approach the question in totally different ways. I first ask myself; who was responsible for Columbine, and Tuscon? The answer I come up with of course is the shooters. Kos isn't doing this. Instead he's simply screaming "Hypocrite!" Isn't that what everyone is complaining about in the first place, the nasty "tone" of the national debate?

I'll flip it right back around. Was Marilyn Manson responsible for Columbine? Apparently yes, so say the liberals in 1999 and today. Weather it's scary music or scary speeches, Liberals always want more control to "protect people" from themselves and remember they never waste a crisis to dump more rules on us. In the case of Daily Kos, his only position is the one best to say the very "vitriolic" things he complains Tea Party members use. Whose the hypocrite now?

This is very consistent with liberals ongoing assault on free speech. There were the quaint days of Liberal icon Al Gore's wife Tipper trying to control art and music to today's nightmare of FCC take over of the Internet with net neutrality. This attempt to shut decent up is just another logical step on the road to socialism for Progressives. You can almost hear their logic sneak in between their words. "People are mostly stupid apes who need our guidance to live better, so we'll take control of their lives and force our agenda on them through government. We'll use any crisis to move quickly before they catch on to the beauty of our plan to reshape America."

They then goal in hand go to the tried and true Saul Alensky play book. "Rule 4, Ridicule," and "Rule 5 Trap Them With Their Own Rules," in this case.

First they called us a "mob."

Then we were "Racist."

Then we were "Crazy."

Now we're "Full of Vitriol."

After the ridicule, they want to tie us up in knots bending over to justify ourselves when in reality it's they who should be explaining why they added 6.4 trillion dollars in debt, ran deficits from 200 billion into the trillions, Social Security and Medicare can't keep up with aggregate demand, why we're loosing the war in Afghanistan, and last why there's 9.5% estimated unemployment and likely much more than that. Those are the real problems facing America, not "vitriol." Coming together in a spirit of cooperation and Kumbaya got us this mess. Divisive politics between Rush Limbaugh, the New York Times, Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich got us four years of balanced budgets.

I suppose we're going to need a new bumper sticker. Metaphors don't kill people, people do. They call us angry? This use of a national tragedy to slander us and score points gives us a right to be angry. It's a testament to how tolerant we really are, because if our freedom were threatened like this in any other country we really would arm ourselves and kill them in mass! But we tolerate them, because we're not the animals they slander us to be.

2 comments:

John Myste said...

I do not think conservatives are by definition mobs, or racists, or full of vitriol. Glad I could support my local conservative.

T. Paine said...

"Not by definition"? Thanks for your support, Myste! :)