Posted on 05/14/2007 9:09:51 PM PDT by jazusamo
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
That people on the political left have a certain set of opinions, just as people do in other parts of the ideological spectrum, is not surprising. What is surprising, however, is how often the opinions of those on the left are accompanied by hostility and even hatred.
Particular issues can arouse passions here and there for anyone with any political views. But, for many on the left, indignation is not a sometime thing. It is a way of life.
How often have you seen conservatives or libertarians take to the streets, shouting angry slogans? How often have conservative students on campus shouted down a visiting speaker or rioted to prevent the visitor from speaking at all?
The source of the anger of liberals, "progressives" or radicals is by no means readily apparent. The targets of their anger have included people who are non-confrontational or even genial, such as Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.
It is hard to think of a time when Karl Rove or Dick Cheney has even raised his voice but they are hated like the devil incarnate.
There doesn't even have to be any identifiable individual to arouse the ire of the left. "Tax cuts for the rich" is more than a political slogan. It is incitement to anger.
All sorts of people can have all sorts of beliefs about what tax rates are best from various points of view. But how can people work themselves into a lather over the fact that some taxpayers are able to keep more of the money they earned, instead of turning it over to politicians to dispense in ways calculated to get themselves re-elected?
The angry left has no time to spend even considering the argument that what they call "tax cuts for the rich" are in fact tax cuts for the economy.
Nor is the idea new that tax cuts can sometimes spur economic growth, resulting in more jobs for workers and higher earnings for business, leading to more tax revenue for the government.
A highly regarded economist once observed that "taxation may be so high as to defeat its object," so that sometimes "a reduction of taxation will run a better chance, than an increase, of balancing the Budget."
Who said that? Milton Friedman? Arthur Laffer? No. It was said in 1933 by John Maynard Keynes, a liberal icon.
Lower tax rates have led to higher tax revenues many times, both before and since Keynes' statement -- the Kennedy tax cuts in the 1960s, the Reagan tax cuts in the 1980s, and the recent Bush tax cuts that have led to record high tax revenues this April.
Budget deficits have often resulted from runaway spending but seldom from reduced tax rates.
Those on the other side may have different arguments. However, the question here is not why the left has different arguments, but why there is such anger.
Often it is an exercise in futility even to seek to find a principle behind the anger. For example, the left's obsession with the high incomes of corporate executives never seems to extend to equally high -- or higher -- incomes of professional athletes, entertainers, or best-selling authors like Danielle Steel.
If the reason for the anger is a feeling that corporate CEOs are overpaid for their contributions, then there should be even more anger at people who get even more money for doing absolutely nothing, because they have inherited fortunes.
Yet how often has the left gotten worked up into high dudgeon over those who inherited the Rockefeller, Roosevelt or Kennedy fortunes? Even spoiled heirs like Paris Hilton don't really seem to set them off.
If it is hard to find a principle behind what angers the left, it is not equally hard to find an attitude.
Their greatest anger seems to be directed at people and things that thwart or undermine the social vision of the left, the political melodrama starring the left as saviors of the poor, the environment, and other busybody tasks that they have taken on.
It seems to be the threat to their egos that they hate. And nothing is more of a threat to their desire to run other people's lives than the free market and its defenders.
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.
LOL! Most of them probably hate their dog too.
that is the idealized way they "want" us to view them. In reality, the left is obsessed with power. Almost everyone I know who is far left, are people with evil in their hearts. The left's ideal world is a totalitarian dictatorship with them in charge. Even then their hatred would only grow. They would be the equal of Stalin or Hitler. Power in the hands of the left is power in the hands of evil.
For the Left, any one who rejects their control leadership over the masses is an enemy.
I believe Dr. Sowell nailed it again with this column, the rage of many on the left really started coming out since the 2000 election and it’s building.
You must live green now! Several of them actually jumped up from the table and left saying they would not eat with her. What is the matter with these idiots!?
**********************************************
It’s the new religion, don’t you know. The Church of Gaia.
Please remember that I purposely said "rank and file" liberals. I was specifically excluding the leaders on the left. Because, as you, I see them as dangerous ideologues who are obsessed with power.
Mark
You are exactly right...You can spot them driving their cars (usually 1976 Volvo's with Jimmy Carter bumper stickers), in stores, any where. They don't even have to speak. You can see the hatred in their faces. It has consumed them and ruined their lives. The women are easier to spot though, with their unshaven legs and armpits.
yes, and I agree with you. You made excellent points. I guess I am just so frustrated with the leftists in Congress and the MSM. I don't understand how the rank and file liberals don't see the damage that Hillary, Pelosi etal are doing to our Republic. Maybe they just turn a blind eye to the evil of their leaders.
No, entitlement to power is their MO. They would rather do away with elections alltogether. Why participate in something where the rules say you may lose?
Nobody who has ever seen a spoiled brat in full tantrum mode can be surprised at the mindset of the typical Prog.
The reason they’re like this? They’ve never been taught to think, they’ve never been taught self-restraint and they’ve never learned that Actions have Consequences.
This is why they must ultimately fail - they have no chance in the long term against disciplined opposition.
Liberalism, in Ten Easy Steps!
(from: The People’s Cube)
Things EVERY Liberal should know:
-How to stage a coup
-How going backwards is progress
-How to empathize with foreign extremists without leaving Starbucks
-How to change the world through activist reporting
-How to defend freedom by abusing and disparaging it
-How to make Bush Derangement Syndrome appear like responsible journalism
-How not to confuse the hammer and sickle with a swastika
-How to root for the underdog who is a Jew-bashing fascist
-How to always lean to the left while reporting from overseas
-How to shoot in the wrong direction and hurt the cause you think you are defending.
-How to oppose dictatorship with misleading information about the true nature of tyranny and oppression.
-How to reach a compromise with evil and lose
anger or negligence? anger or stupidity? anger or naive? What metaphor must you use? Lets not use any. They are simply as Red Foreman would say, “dumbasses!”
Liberals come in all shapes, sizes, colors and religions. Those leading the pack know exactly what their agenda is. Their followers---those they managed to brainwash---are incapable of seeing the long-range effects.
When conservatives put out warnings that the country, as we know it, is heading for destruction, liberals may see us as Chicken Little and "The sky is falling!"
But unlike Chicken Little, the clear evidence has been all around this country for at least forty years and has consistently grown worse.
Without some drastic action, e.g., conservatives fighting actively, fearlessly, and in unison, it appears that this administration will continue to ignore us.
Absolutely true. There were two people at work (one retired) who were as left as can be and they were the most spiteful, bitter, hateful people I've known in a long time. One has his credit cards all maxed out and will no doubt file for bankruptcy. The other uses her position to bully people who have no means to defend themselves. Both are truly pathetic excuses for humans.
If I could count on that, I wouldn't give a thought, for instance, to the fear of Madame Hillary becoming President Clinton.
I would also rest in the believe that, in a few years or so, all illegal aliens will be deported to their native countries and our now-open borders will be effectively closed.
I'll save time and space by not mentioning all the other hot issues, but we all know what they are.
It’s more a matter of dominance and submission than substance. The schoolyard bully is allowed to vent his anger, his victims are not. The left’s ideas control the institutions of power in this country, particularly the media, they won’t face serious sanctions for displays of anger, starting with crucifixion in the press.
It’s almost like a different species, they are so uncivilized
Many years ago in school (around 7th or 8th grade, I think), during a discussion of the Vietnam war, I said that the quickest way to end the war would be to win it.
Several people jumped out of their chairs to scream at me.
They haven't changed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.