HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
May 3, 2008 There are several truths that liberals never seem to be able to grasp which at least partly explains why liberalism just doesn't work as a political philosophy. First of all, people are different. Why that's such a hard concept to understand is beyond me, but it seems that one, logical understanding of any civilized country simply escapes those who are almost literally salivating to take control of our government and run it for us. The left seems to believe that everyone is identical in potential, abilities, strengths and weaknesses and the only thing that makes us UNequal is some conspiracy--most often characterized as a conspiracy by rich, selfish, white men. They believe this to be particularly true with regard to the sexes. That's one of the reason the left invented such stupidities as "gender-norming" and even "race-norming" where there is any competition involved. One of the most vocal (and powerful) proponents of gender-norming in a terribly misguided effort to "equalize" men and women in the workplace and in the military was the former Congresswoman from Colorado--Patricia Shroeder....she of the tearful acknowledgement when Colorado nominated her as a "favorite daughter" in 1992. Thank God she's gone from the halls of Congress. After women were allowed to attend the service academies someone noticed that senior class officers were always men. The reason for that was that BOTH academic excellence and physical proficiencies were the criteria by which the officers were selected, and, while women were academically the equal of the men, they were not physically so. In fact, the BEST of the women physically were still worse than the worst of the men. Those criteria had been used for well over a century to select class officers, but all of a sudden they were now deemed to be "unfair." At Shroeder's urging, "gender-norming" was instituted. Henceforth, women cadets would no longer have to compete as equals with the men physically. Their scores were to be compared only with the scores of other women cadets--not with the corps of cadets as a whole. That way, the best of the women would have the same standing as the best of the men and they COULD then serve as class officers. That's what Democrats consider "fairness;" equality of outcome instead of equality of opportunity. I've always been fascinated at how deceptive Democrats are in order to stay in political power. Conservative Republicans have no problem with telling the voting public precisely who they are and what they believe in...lower taxes, less government intrusion, fewer regulations, a non-activist federal court system and a strong, well-equipped military. The reason is, that MOST Americans, unless they are completely wedded to the concept of receiving "something for nothing" from the federal government, share those beliefs. Liberals, on the other hand, must PRETEND to be conservative in order to get elected....except in those few, isolated enclaves of left-wing nuts such as San Francisco, Berkeley, Seattle and Madison, WI or in minority-dominated inner cities like New York, Boston, Baltimore and Washington D.C. In what the Democrat elitists consider to be "fly-over country"--that part of the United States that actually makes the country work--they must talk like conservatives to win elections. Once in office, they can vote and otherwise behave however they wish because the power of incumbency can keep them IN office unless they go completely off the reservation as Ms McKinney did a few years back. Republicans are now the minority party in Congress in large measure because over the last 7 years, in matters of the budget, they've behaved PRECISELY like liberal Democrats--grabbing with both hands, the taxpayers' money to spend on every cock-a-mamie scheme and project some constituent brings before them. I know that it's popular to blame the war in Iraq, but out of control spending and that idiotic illegal alien amnesty plan were VERY big factors--combined, probably as much as 90% of the reason people turned to other candidates--in the country's interior, to candidates who promised spending restraint (even if they had no intention of keeping that promise in the long run.) In almost every instance, where an incumbent Republican, running for re-election, was defeated by a Democrat, that Democrat ran as a conservative and campaigned, in part, against his GOP opponent's spending record. ------------ About the author: David A. Jared is a news junkie, semi-retired and an avid golfer who's been writing his first book, "4000 years of chopsticks" for the last 20 years. Email: jaredland@sbcglobal.net ------------- All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
