HERITAGE FOUNDATION: "How Modern Liberals Think"

Is it me or isn’t it the same actor who played Josey Wales’ bounty hunter (or former guerilla leader) the same guy who played the Police Commissioner (who’s always on Harry Callahan’s case) in Eastwood’s Dirty Harry movies?

First time I've seen it and loved it. He is soooo right. I like his conclusion that the problem is that they have literally been brain washed to be indiscriminative. That is the word I have been searching for. INDISCRIMINATE. Make no distinctions. In other words, they do not think. You have to make judgments in order to think.

Well, I sent it along to my brain washed liberal professor daughter who doesn't speak to me anyway. She won't watch it, but I keep trying.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2133962/posts

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm1KOBMg1Y8

Some good stuff in that video from HowObamagotelected.com

I cant answser that one.

That Youtube video is a certified classic for conservatives. As I’ve said..seen it more than 20 times in 2 years and never got tired of it. Wished there was a shortened version of it though but then again, why watch a hour version of Gone with the Wind?

How Obama got elected.

Also the non-white vote was incredibly anti-white:

Race: Obama/McCain
White Americans: 43/55
Black Americans: 95/4
Latino Americans: 67/31
Asian Americans: 62/35
Other Americans: 66/31

This is our reward for the ’65 immigration act.

A very interesting take from a former New York Jewish liberal about the liberal syllogism. One starts off with a New York Jewish mindset: Republicans bad; Democrats good. One becomes marinated for decades in a culture, especially the educational institutions and pop-culture, which inculcate a series of propositions which are accepted as postulates. The most debilitating one being: discrimination is bad. This leads to a mindset which rejects discriminations of all sorts, which others now call relativism, and which reduces cognition to reaction.

One can understand how the aversion to discrimination would find fertile ground in a people who have been so discriminated against over millennia and American Jews have famously and righteously fought against racial and ethnic discrimination in America. Evan Sayet says that aversion to making discriminations has led to a nihilism in our culture. A resolute determination by the left not to judge. Therefore a modern liberal cannot choose, or more accurately, steadfastly refuses to choose between that which produces good and that which produces evil.

I for one have been concerned about this phenomenon and have addressed it on my about page in which I argued that liberalism is an empty philosophy which avoids exposing itself to rational analysis by resort to the race card. So Sayet performs a service in attempting to tell us how it is that liberals got to the place where relativism rules and nihilism looms. The race card is the greatest enabler for liberals, it simply shuts down all debate, it shuts down the Old Testament commitment for good over evil.

Although Sayet does not go there, I have for some time been equally concerned about how the exponents of The Frankfurt School have provided the language and the rationale by which the left has substituted its shibboliths for rational thought. Relativism itself is an explicit product of The Frankfurt School and I think it is important to see that it was a deliberately fashioned tool to get society's mind to the place where it would reject those values which opposed communism and accept those values (or in this case actually reject all values) which welcome collectivism. The Frankfurt School has also given us the illogic of feminism, the dogmatism of anti-Americanism, the nihilism of cultural Marxism. The list of The Frankfurt School syllogisms is long and it is ever lurking on our shoulder, not the shoulder where the better angels of our nature roost. So this brings us back to Evan Sayet who does not tell us why the school should be in so infected but simply sees that they are. He knows this from his New York liberal Jewish experience.

There is another layer of the onion which I wish Sayet had attempted to peel away. What is the human impulse that leaves liberals in this debased state? For the answer to this question, I think we should turn to another former Jewish liberal, Dennis Prager. Prager is noteworthy among radio personalities because he attempts to grapple with fundamental questions. A few years ago he wrote a column to the effect that one's politics are fixed by whether we think of men as good or evil. His assertion is counterintuitive, liberals regard man as good and conservatives see man and evil. So we Christian conservatives do not see man as in need of instruction or motivation, we see him in need of redemption. Prager says that liberals see man as good, or at least as a blank slate, which can be stimulated to behaviors which liberals approve of-like using condoms. One need not look further than the children singing the Obama songs or the use of the quasi military garb prancing about, to understand this impulse. The compulsory civilian service to the nation which Obama intends to impose on the generations coming of age is only the inevitable expression of this belief in the perfectibility of man.

Finally, one more layer of the onion. The real fundamental difference between liberals and conservatives is the absence of or the belief in God. Liberals essentially reject God because they are committed to playing God. All of the rest of the belief structure, all the posturing of concern and commitment to society, all of the convolution of the language, all of the rejection of a rational discrimination, is nothing but a rationalization allowing the liberal to play God. This is the oldest and gravest sin known to the Judeo-Christian tradition. All of the hate, intolerance, and vilification of Christianity (read Sarah Palin) is a visceral reaction to the frustration they encounter from conservatives as they play God. Ann Coulter got it right in the tagline to one of her books: "they would be God." The ultimate example of playing God is the issue of "choice." Fundamental to the Judeo-Christian heritage is respect for human life because it is a creation of God. Abortion, even more than slavery, is the ultimate in playing God, one declares his transcendence over God's creation and in the stroke of a knife becomes God himself.

ping

That’s a great synopsis. Many thanks.

You are often a good source of insight. Keep it up.

Thanks for the link! He echos my thoughts exactly.. 9/11 woke me the heck up. I was a Pro Defense Democrat before that. It is beyond me how anyone can still be a Democrat post 9/11. They put politics above Country.

Standing O!!!

Very good. Original sin=they would be God.