The Disingenuous Immorality of American Liberalism

IT’S NOT WHAT YOU THINK IT IS, FOLKS

When we think of politics in terms of morality – or immorality – we tend to focus on social issues: pro-choice or pro-life, gay marriage, racism, religious tolerance, or lack thereof -to name a few. The morality, or immorality of these issues – and others – lies in the eye of the beholder. These are wedge issues – arguments about which, seldom change minds.

Pro-life advocates believe that abortion is immoral, while those who support “a woman’s right to choose” see it the other way around. Those who are intolerant of Christianity often accuse Christians of bigotry toward other faiths – or those with no faith at all. The same logic applies to gay marriage, affirmative action, and the legalization of drugs or prostitution.

When I speak of liberal immorality, my point of reference goes beyond social issues to a kind of immorality that is far more insidious – a kind of immorality that is the cruelest of them all -an immorality that often cannot be proved as being such – until it’s too late. 

As a conservative author, I have, with regularity, highlighted “political lies” in past articles. Its definition – which is displayed in the sidebar of my personal blog – is pretty simple:

LIBERALS SAYING THINGS THEY KNOW AREN’T TRUE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF PATRONIZING THE ‘LESS THAN INFORMED’ FOR POLITICAL GAIN

The effective use of political lies is a basic tenet of American liberalism.

Democrats must keep their historically dependable voting blocs in the fold if they are to win elections, and/or hold onto power. For this to occur, they must make sure those blocs continue to believe that without the protection provided them by Democratic Party -Republicans, corporations, and the religious right would run roughshod. Here lies the heart of political lies – along with a super-sized order of scare tactics thrown in for good measure. 

“Bush’s tax cuts for the rich” is one of the most effective political lies in history. It’s easy to remember, and the inclusion of “rich” is a constant reminder to less fortunate Americans who may be inclined to resent those who are successful – and it plays on the zero-sum mentality of the left; the more that someone else gets, the less that’s left for you.

The problem, of course, is that it’s ridiculous nonsense. In 2010, the top 5% of taxpayers earned 37% of AGI and paid 60% of total income taxes, while the bottom 49% of workers paid no income taxes at all. Does anyone honestly believe that Barack Obama and the Democrats in Congress are unaware of these statistics? Of course not, but here’s the deal – all that matters to them is that the average laborer, minority, or college student remains unaware – or doesn’t care.

Democrats know that the perpetuation of the political lie also perpetuates class warfare, which in turn, all but guarantees that traditional liberal voting blocs will continue to vote Democratic. Game, set, match – in the eye of the liberal politician.

Both parties have been complicit in creating the misconception that a worker’s Social Security “contributions” are deposited into an individual account – the value of which will ultimately determine the amount of that worker’s retirement benefit. (vs. the reality that the Social Security system is actually a transfer program, by which younger workers fund the retirement benefits of older workers.) But here’s the difference:

While Republicans have attempted to educate Americans on the upside of investing a portion of their retirement savings into individual accounts – including the variable markets – Democrats have successfully painted an incorrect picture of “irresponsible” Republicans who would allow workers to put their retirement assets at risk by making unwise decisions. What exactly does that say about the Democrats’ view of the worker?

The political lie? Is it realistic to assume that a majority of Democrats in government – along with the rest of us – have a portion of their retirement assets (as well as their other holdings) invested in diversified portfolios that include equity investments? Of course it is.

The real immorality of American liberalism has two components: 

First, the use of scare tactics based on lies told knowingly. Television ads depicting a Paul Ryan look-a-like throwing an elderly woman over a cliff, or Wasserman-Schultz’s claim that Republican proposals would “throw America’s youth to the wolves,” are disgraceful in their deceit. We will see worse.

Second, and perhaps the cruelest consequence of all: Forcing our children – or our grandchildren – to face the stark reality of the results of today’s disingenuous political tactics somewhere down the road – when it’s too late. 

As for the collective conscience of those who perpetuate political lies and unfounded fears? No problem; most of them will have long since retired – comfortably, of course.

About these ads


Categories: Hypocrisy at its Finest, Liberal Hypocrisy, Liberal Political Lies, Nonsense, Planet Obama

4 replies

  1. So when you sap our entitlements, when Social security is sapped – when you have destroyed medicare. when you have dismantled every social entitlement to which you yourself got to enjoy for yourself. And when your grandchildren are left with JACKSHIT. HOw will you feel?

    To Kill entitlements to save the grand-babies is the most disingenuous message in the filthy republican playbook

    And American ain’t buying it, chump

  2. Anonymous – you’re an idiot; please stay out of political discussions

What's Your Take?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,498 other followers

%d bloggers like this: