I’ve met some Obamabots–even here in America’s Third World County where Democrats, let alone dyed-in-the-wool Dhimmicraps, are scarcer than hens’ teeth–recently that have caused me to go back and examine some stereotypes.
But first, a fore-word: before you get the wrong idea (even though I know it’s probably too late for that), stereotypes are good things, as long as we know we use them as shortcuts, as models based on a reality that is far more complex than the most accurate model can be. Stereotypes exist because a great preponderance of a certain class of objects or persons share characteristics that make them a class. We could substitute “class” for “stereotype” except that stereotypes embody more data than we can actually weight classes with via objective criteria–data derived from firsthand, subjective interaction with objects or persons. Now, because it is subjective interaction that adds the stereotyping, it involves a certain amount of projection, and therein lies the danger of stereotyping: if the emotional projection isn’t consciously recognized and analyzed for its qualitative values, for what it both contributes to or detracts from the observations leading to the development of ones own stereotypes, then one runs the danger of having models that aren’t very useful.
That said, my model, if you want to put the word “stereotypes” on the shelf, of contemporary faux liberals and those who support their agendas as falling into two general classes–the truly, wittingly evil and the stupidly, lazily evil–has held up fairly well in my encounters with Obamabots.
“Evil?!?” you may screech. Yep. You see, it doesn’t matter one damned plugged nickel whether a contemporary faux liberal (or a faux liberal enabler) such as Obama or his coterie of Chicago-style, (mostly) corrupt, socialist hangers-on have “good” intentions or just normal, Chicago-style, (mostly) corrupt, socialist genuinely evil intentions, because the end result of their behavior is evil.
Yes, evil. For they are intent–even the most stupidly altruistic of them–on dictating YOUR “best interests” as they see them, instead of allowing you the freedom to make those decisions on your own or with counsel of your own choosing. And that–compelling behavior to comply with THEIR ideology that the state is the fount of all that is good and that THEY, the self-anointed enlightened, decide what is good for you, the poor benighted idiot who does not belong to their club–is indeed evil.
Not even the God they so frequently rail against is that tyrannical. He has simply pointed out Good and Evil and said that Good will lead to Him while evil will lead to eternal death. Make your own choice and live–or die–with it. The statists who disingenuously call themselves liberals want to make your choices for you. Free will? Nope. That’s out, along with the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence.
To any who call yourself “liberal” or “progressive” let me offer you this: when you can show me–using facts and reason, not whiny faux-victim bleats–that denying free political speech to someone because his speech offends some hypersensitive whiny rabbit is a genuinely liberal act, then we can start discussing what’s right or wrong with the “philosophy of consolation for the West as it commits suicide” that is contemporary so-called liberalism/progressivism.
As far as I can see, there is no real difference between the evil results of those faux liberals who know the evil they are doing and those faux liberals (and their enablers) who intend to do good but simply are too lazy (morally and intellectually) to think things through.
“By their fruits ye shall know them.” (Matthew 7:16)
Oh, and another lil question for any faux liberal who might wander by: When, oh when, will you and your ilk articulate an exit strategy for the quagmire you’ve unconstitutionally stuck the country in with your “War on Poverty”–the fruits of which have been advancing illiteracy, more poverty, and worse? Oh, right. To a faux liberal those are all good things, because they form a pretext for the government, at your behest, to do more harm.
