"If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime - Pol Pot or others - that had no concern for human beings,"
-Dick Durbin
“Let’s agree to disagree…MY ASS!”
In 1776 two men could have sat together at a family get together and had a discussion during which they disagreed about state sovereignty. In 1876 the disagreement could have been about whether or not the role of the federal government should be expanded or limited. In both of the instances two people could have sat down and had a legitimate conversation about their differences in philosophy concerning both of these topics. It really wouldn’t be practical to say whether one person was absolutely right and one was absolutely wrong. Their opinion would be just that…an opinion. They could agree to disagree.
Now let’s say that the first conversation changes to whether or not the freedom of speech is an inalienable right. The second conversation turns to whether or not blacks should be free and whether or not they should enjoy the same freedoms as whites.
Unlike the first example where there were basic philosophical differences in opinion, there are now clear fundamental differences. Right and wrong. Good and bad. It is a fact that all people should enjoy the freedom of speech. It is a fact that all people should enjoy freedom and liberty regardless of race, ethnicity, or religion.
The Code of Hammurabi, which was one of the earliest written laws, was based on the fundamental belief by most everyone that there were basic rules of right and wrong. It’s wrong to murder your neighbor. It’s wrong to steal your neighbor’s cow. You get it.
So much of what divides the country today is not about philosophical differences in opinion, but rather about right and wrong. Democrats and Republicans that may have once been divided about big government versus big business now find that is one of the few points that they actually come close to agreeing on. Now it’s more a matter of bigger government and big business versus big government and big business. In this regard I feel they are both wrong, but that is just my opinion. I could agree to disagree with someone on that point.
The Democratic party is now compromised primarily of what I like to call “New Democrats.” These “New Democrats” share virtually nothing in common with their early predecessors. They have slowly infiltrated their way into the party and in a few years completely own it. Traditional Democrats who have not died, retired, or been reelected, have transformed to accommodate the party’s new ideology. Senators such as Joseph Lieberman are finding that they are a dying breed and have no place in the new Democratic party.
“New Democrats” hate nearly all of the fundamental principles on which the United States was founded. A belief in capitalism, a strong military, state sovereignty, and individual liberties are not values supported by today’s democrats.
Sure, democrats will say that they support these values but that is simply not the case. There is a saying, “Your actions speak so loud that I cannot hear what you say.” This is a quite fitting phrase as it pertains to the democratic party today.
While listening to democrats spew their lines of B.S about how they are tough on security, supportive of the military, and advocates of Constitutional protection I’m often reminded of a scene from the movie Mars Attacks.
In the comedy about aliens that invade the world there is a scene where the odd looking beings prepare to address a crowd of people that have gathered to witness the monumental event. The Martian approaches the podium and speaks into a voice interpreter. Out of the speakers boom the phrase, “We come in peace. We come in peace.” Then without warning the little Martians begin firing their ray guns into the crowd disintegrating their targets instantly. The entire time that they are firing the little Martians continue to repeat the phrase, “We come in peace. We come in peace…” over and over.
This is a classic example of what the “New Democrats” are doing to this country. They tell us how tough they are on terror, how much they love their country and their military, and all the while they are destroying the fundamental principles on which our country was founded by perpetuating their political correctness and culture of appeasement. They claim to support the rights of citizens guaranteed by the Constitution, yet they pick and choose the rights that they are willing to champion. They claim to stand up for the common person, yet they think that the common person is inferior to the government when making many decisions.
Again, it is not the fact that they call themselves Democrats that make them detrimental to the fabric of our nation, but it is their ideologies. The traditional southern democrat has been annihilated and replaced by the new elitist arrogant “I’m smarter than you” liberal.
Often when individuals tell me that they are democrats I say, “Oh really. Not me. I LOVE my country.” This is a great icebreaker and usually after I have crushed them on a debate of the topics this leads the spineless little liberal to reply, “Well, we’re all entitled to our opinions.”
Sure, you are entitled to your opinion and entitled to be wrong. I feel I have an obligation to tell them they are wrong. This inevitably leads to the comment, “Well, that’s your opinion.”
As I stated earlier, there is a right and wrong side to many issues. Most Americans have not stepped back and really analyzed the party differences on issues and what they mean to our way of life. If they had, they would identify the same facts that I have described that prove without question that the Democratic party of today detests the America that the founding fathers envisioned. When a person finally begins to understand how to watch the news, how to read between the lines, and how to think instead of feel about issues, they will see examples of anti-American liberal sentiment everyday. These liberals are generally dressed up to look just like democrats.
One thing cannot be disputed. Liberals are very clever little critters. They have found ways to advance their flawed policies and sell them over and over to the American people since the 1960’s. The “war on poverty,” introduced by President John F. Kennedy in 1962 and implemented in 1964 by President Lyndon Johnson, was meant to alleviate the growing problem of poverty in America. The irony of the situation however, is that the official poverty line had been continuously declining since 1960, and was only about half of what it had been in 1950.
Despite claims that these programs would assist people in becoming self-sufficient, the very opposite happened. The number of people receiving government assistance more than doubled from 1960 to 1977. Eventually a larger number of people were living in official poverty in 1992 than were in poverty in 1962 when the “war on poverty was introduced. Still the liberals continue to insist that more money is needed to make the programs work. The money is the food and the problem gets fatter and fatter now with each decade since the war on poverty began.
Like the war on poverty, Johnson identified the teen pregnancy rate as a growing problem. The teen pregnancy rate, though, had been steadily declining with each decade since 1940. His answer was to increase the amount of money and information provided in family planning and sex education curriculums.
Since Johnson’s progressive ideas took hold the amount of money spent on these programs has grown out of control. The teen pregnancy rate has also grown at an astonishing and consistent rate. The fact is that more explicit sex information, condom distribution, and government programs do not help to solve teen pregnancy problems. Good family structures, instilling morals, and consistent discipline will do more than any liberal program will ever do and they don’t cost a cent.
Regardless of their failed policies, liberals seek to grow their programs. And why? They have a larger initiative to grow their government and to grow the control the government plays in the lives of people. That is what makes them liberals. The see government as a savior. This probably dates back to Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal” when the federal government was used to get the country back on it’s feet. Government programs and federal controls have grown more than FDR could have ever imagined or ever intended.
Even with their constant policy failures, liberals are still able to maintain and grow their programs. In Thomas Sowell’s book “The Vision of the Anointed” Sowell outlines a distinct “pattern of failure” that liberals use to continue furthering their agendas. Sowell breaks down the pattern into four stages:
STAGE 1. THE “CRISIS”: When a situation exists that liberals wish to eliminate they routinely turn that issue into a “crisis.” The impact and influence of this liberal tactic can be seen routinely in our society. Phrases like “climate crisis” and “health care crisis” are commonplace in our daily lives. Many of these “crisis” situations are nowhere near a “crisis” level and many have been improving for years.
STAGE 2. THE “SOLUTION“: Following implementation of the crisis stage, liberals will then advocate their solution which inevitably involves throwing someone else’s money at the problem. Critics will say that the policy will be detrimental and will even cause the problem to grow. Liberals will then dismiss these criticisms as be simple or dishonest and will often characterize their detractors as lacking compassion.
STAGE 3. THE RESULTS: The implemented liberal policy will fail or make the problem worse.
STAGE 4. THE RESPONSE: Liberals will inevitably manipulate their policy’s problem in order to lay blame on their critics. They will say that their critics were “simplistic” and failed to ignore the “complexities” of the issue. They will also confuse the issue and the public by relying on their belief that Americans are stupid and they will talk about the “many factors” that contributed to the outcome. Eventually their solution to the continuing problem will be to spend more money on the problem as the prior programs were “under funded.” And the cycle repeats.
Examples of the liberal pattern are all too abundant. A couple were mentioned previously with the “war on poverty” and the teen pregnancy debacles. In order to see these tactics at work one must only open any newspaper or turn on any T.V on any given day.