FALSE PIPERS:
CHRISTIANITY: Modern Christianity tends to be practiced unconvincingly, both by conservatives and liberals. Too many conservatives bring their judgment into question as they rely on nonsensically literalistic and fundamentalist views of sacred stories. Too many liberals bring their judgment into question insofar as they rely on absolutist interpretations of homilies about nonjudgmentalism, which were meant for contextual appreciation, not as excuses for tolerating every conceivable depredation. Simply put, “New Rome” is rapidly losing spiritual glue of enough strength to protect it from falling apart.
FALSE HOPE: Tending to believe mainly in government, rather than in any sort of God or higher source of spirituality, liberals tend to feel malaise and hopelessness except as they rally in “hope” around politicians who promise a sort of salvation through government. Insofar as divorced from belief in actualizing Will, such hope and promise are always vain and empty, and always most intoxicating when played by skilled pipers to the young and unseasoned.
IRRATIONAL EXUBERANCE: When a population loses character and will for enforcing the laws it already has, why should it expect to fare better merely by passing more laws? For liberals merely to enact laws and expect results, without exercising disciplined force of will, is to feed sh*t to a goose and fantasize that it will stick. Unbacked by spiritual or inspired character, laws and liberals become merely ludicrous.
SELF CONTRADICTIONS: Oddly enough, in time, money and resources, the same liberals who tend to view conservatives as mean and unfair tend to contribute less to charitable concerns, instead expecting that grace should fall from government. See http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/Peter_Schweizer/2008/06/02/100864.html.
3 comments:
QUOTES: See snippits following below, of quotes from http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/Peter_Schweizer/2008/06/02/100864.html:
Equally revealing, liberals are far more likely to say they are depressed and to view the world bleakly. Schweizer attributes that to an attitude that they and those around them are victims and helpless unless the government intervenes
In fact, Schweizer writes, self-described liberals and Democrats, who profess to be tolerant, are much more likely to embrace stereotypes of Jews than conservatives or Republicans. Some 45 percent of self-described “strong” Democrats or liberals agree with the statement that Jews are inordinately rich and money-driven, compared with 36 percent of strong Republicans and conservatives.
Schweizer cites similar research to show that even when they are in the same income brackets, liberals are far more likely to complain about their jobs, families, neighbors, health, and their relative wealth than conservatives.
Liberals are much more likely to say that money is important to them, according to the surveys Schweizer cites. They are two and a half times more likely to be resentful of others’ success and 50 percent more likely to be jealous of other people’s good luck. Conservatives are much more likely than liberals to spend time with their families, hug their children, and be close to their parents.
Liberals tend to work less hard and are more likely than conservatives to embrace leisure time as desirable. When asked if competition is good, those who defined themselves as very liberal say yes only 14 percent of the time, compared with 43 percent for conservatives.
Liberals are more likely to say that truth is something that is “relative.” When asked if they believe in ghosts, 42 percent of liberals say they do, compared with 25 percent of conservatives. Liberals are more likely to say that’s it’s OK to be dishonest or deceptive, cheat on taxes, keep money that doesn’t belong to them, and sell a used car with a faulty transmission to a family member.
Overall, conservatives are more satisfied with their lives, their professions, and their health compared with liberals of the same age and income level.
Schweizer balances these findings with a few issues where liberals come out ahead. He says liberals are more likely than conservatives to be open to new experiences in travel, art, and music. But Schweizer exposes hypocrisy at the core of liberal beliefs. While liberals claim to be compassionate and to care about the poor, conservatives are much more likely to donate their time and money to charitable causes.
When Reich ran for governor of Massachusetts in 2002, his tax returns revealed income of more than $1 million, but he contributed just $2,714 to charity, or less than 0.3 percent.
Schweizer says liberalism is appealing because it gives lip service to lofty ideals but demands little action. Liberalism considers as noble those who complain about personal difficulties and display anger or denounce our “money-making culture,” but liberalism does not stress taking personal responsibility and action.
See
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/02/obamas_politics_of_collective.html
From http://www.anncoulter.com/ :
Words mean nothing to liberals. They say whatever will help advance their cause at the moment, switch talking points in a heartbeat, and then act indignant if anyone uses the exact same argument they were using five minutes ago.
When Gore won the popular vote in the 2000 election by half a percentage point, but lost the Electoral College -- or, for short, "the constitutionally prescribed method for choosing presidents" -- anyone who denied the sacred importance of the popular vote was either an idiot or a dangerous partisan.
But now Hillary has won the popular vote in a Democratic primary, while Obambi has won under the rules. In a spectacular turnabout, media commentators are heaping sarcasm on our plucky Hillary for imagining the "popular vote" has any relevance whatsoever.
Post a Comment