Mike: The Difference between Republicans and Democrats
The most common thread I have been able to detect within the "Liberals" of our time is their thirst for state dependece, an end to personal independence and freedom, and the devaluing of human life.
Mike says it pretty well. Unlike Cameron, who is for some reason afraid of the right (I have no clue why. I'll say it again... it's amazing to me how some people can see the world completely different than I do. What are they looking at?), I'm much more afraid of the left.
Update: I'm finally getting to write an update to this (mostly as a response to an anonymous e-mail I got), after I posted this early today. I admit this post was a little extreme, and I've explained the circumstances that led me to post it. With that in mind, I stand behind what it says.
- "Thirst for state dependence" -- one of the essential aspects of liberalism is the quest for big government. Everything from unemployment and welfare to socialized health care, as well as taxing marriage, death, and everything in between.
- I'll admit "end to personal independence and freedom" is pretty broad, though I'll cite gun control as a major issue here. For some reason, liberals tend to be anti-gun. I live in New Jersey, where McGreevey legislated that safety mechanisms which haven't been invented yet have to be put on guns once they're invented. I certainly took it as an affront to my personal liberty and privacy when I was forced to be fingerprinted and provide psychiatric release forms, as well as provide lots of personal information and character references, when I recently applied for my gun license. And if they're nice enough to grant it to me, they still dictate what I'm allowed to do with it - that I'm not allowed to carry it on my person without another license, and that I'm only allowed to have it in my car if I'm taking it to or from a firing range or for hunting, and on and on. California is even worse, where they dictate to you how you must keep your possessions stored in your home: by law you must keep your gun and your ammunition locked up and in separate places. Taxes could also be considered a part of this - the more money that goes to the government, the less we have for ourselves. Furthermore, The government can dictate who we must hire with affirmative action, and that children can't pray in schools.
- "Devaluing of human life" is all over the place, and the author cited a lot of it. Removal of capital punishment for capital offenses diminishes the nature of the crimes, and brings with it the devaluation of the human life the offense was committed against. Similarly, abortion makes our children expendable. The push for the adoption of gay marriage destroys the sanctity of marriage. Affirmative action denies the equality of all men by asserting that some are to incapable to get by on their own merit. I've pointed out Hillary's racist statements here before. I think the author correctly points out the hypocrisy of denying the death penalty while affirming "the right" to abortion. I think he's also dead on in criticizing groups like PETA, who don't protest when suicide bombers kill people, but do when they kill a donkey.
To continue, the things like the PATRIOT act you cite were passed by both parties, and I think people on both sides are a little uncomfortable with some things, including myself. I think we were a little hasty in enacting broad, sweeping measures in the days after September 11th. I think that hasty mindset has largely passed.
However, like I said, I'm more scared, long-term, of the socialist ideas of the left. They're against the ideals of this country, and I see them as more dangerous in the long run than any of the legislation that was passed shortly after September 11th. I don't think the left has what's best in mind for the country -- for instance, right now, when we're about to go to war, and our time could be spent on much better things, the Democrats are fillibustering Miguel Estrada. The democrats claim it was because he hasn't answered their questions, but no one asked any!
Anyway, hopefully you won't mind quoting a bit of your e-mail (since your e-mail was anonymous anyway):
I don't think I've seen you EVER post an open minded opinion. Your alway so certain you never seem to ask any important questions.
Hey, I'm open... what questions would you like me to ask? I'm not being sarcastic at all. I'd love to hear your opinions. Let me know what I'm neglecting to take into consideration.
I sincerely appreciate your e-mail, and your comment (if that was you). I'm always open for dialogue, so I'd be glad to hear from you again if you'd like to respond.
Monday, March 10, 2003
Permalink
Keith - I'm a new reader of your blog and I have to say that I really like your stuff. You seem like an amazingly bright person who is passionate about their craft. I have to say, though, that these types of posts are the one thing that drive me nuts about blogs. You are not going to change anyone's mind about their political stance. The only thing that can happen is that you'll piss off roughly 50% of your readers. I love reading through your entries regarding development, computer languages, etc., but I personally disagree 100% with your political views. It is good to challenge one's thinking with ideas from the opposite side, but the cost is a partial audience that feels as though they were just slapped.
Just food for thought. I don't mean to take it out on you - I've read a few blogs lately that start needless political debates and nothing good ever comes from it.