I used to wonder why
liberals were so violently opposed to conservatism and hostile toward
Christianity but so tolerant of radical Islamism. Why do liberals cite the medieval
terrors of the inquisition and the crusades as proof of the immorality of
Christianity yet ignore the contemporary, murderous oppression of the Mullahs
and the Taliban? Why do liberals point to the Salem Witch Trials (1692-1693) to
prove Christianity’s disdain for women yet poo poo the flogging and
imprisonment of Muslim women convicted of committing “forced adultery”? I don’t
wonder any more however, I know the answer Islamism and liberalism are
basically the same thing.
1)
Both love big government. In order to impose a coercive agenda,
government control is essential. Limited
government by its very nature is not capable of nor does it seek to impose an
oppressive set of controls on the individual. Limited government recognizes the
sovereignty of the individual, big government denies individual sovereignty.
You cannot be trusted to make up your own minds, to decide what religion to
follow, what light bulb to use, what clothes to wear what food to eat, when and
where to pray, what to listen to on the radio, or what conduct you should or
should not find acceptable. You can take every one of these examples and find a
case where they apply to either liberals or Islamists (except Islamists don’t
necessarily care about light bulbs). Both systems “bet the farm” on the idea that
governmental authority can create a new and Utopian society if only the
decisions are removed from the prevue of the individual and placed in the hands
of masterminds (or Mullahs).
2)
Both are intolerant of dissent. Once you establish that the good of the
society is best served by the theocracy/bureaucracy, than opposition to those
institutions becomes harmful to society. If a woman wears pants or doesn’t
cover her head then society is threatened. Likewise anyone who rejects gay marriage
or doesn’t drink the climate change “cool aid” is a threat. For a despotic
regime to be successful then uniformity of the masses must be achieved,
individualism must be suppressed, except when the individual is useful to the
state. In Islamist countries they have the full power of law to deal with descent;
liberals have it harder at least for the moment. They have to settle for name
calling bullying and intimidation. Who wants to oppose the powers that be if
they have to be put through what the Palin family has? How many men have the courage to bear up under
the lies and accusations that Clarence Thomas did? Have you not noticed that
any and all opposition to Obama is racism, that any lie about Romney is OK, i.e.
Romney killed my wife, or Paul Ryan wants to take Medicare away from seniors,
but Obama can lie endlessly about creating millions of jobs, or cover up a
deadly scandal like fast and furious and hardly receive one tough question
about it? Next time a liberal claims to believe in tolerance we should meet
that claim with scornful laughter.
3)
Neither cherishes freedom of speech. Of course
the liberals love to claim the 1st amendment to protect crucifixes submerged
in urine, or any form of pornography, but those fit the liberal utopian model. However, let speech that is inconvenient to
them be spoken and they are up in arms. If liberals truly loved free speech they
would never have pushed for a fairness doctrine that would silence conservative
talk radio, they would not have attacked private citizens like Rush Limbaugh
from the Senate floor nor would the President’s lackeys probe Sean Hannity and
Fox News. This is the work of despots not statesmen. In Pakistan a young mother
named Asia Bibi sits upon death row, her crime: she made the following statement,
“My Christ is alive.” (for more info and to sign a petition on her behalf
please visit http://www.callformercy.com/)
Liberals do not as yet have the power of
the death penalty but they have certainly come to an important consensus with
the Islamists in recent weeks. Somebody made a video that offended Muslims
(what doesn’t?) So as is their want they
went on a killing rioting rampage. What is interesting is that both Islamist dictators
and liberal pundits agree: the problem is not that the mobs are killing each
other over some cheesy video, no the problem is too much free speech. Obama and
Clinton have gone out of their way to make sure everyone knows it is the fault
of the video not the bloodthirsty mobs, we feel their pain, though officially we
think the murders are going a little too far. We apologize over and again, our
Egyptian embassy apologized, see how that placated the mob? We are currently
spending 70,000 taxpayer dollars to produce and air apologies in Pakistan. Compare
these quotes: “We, as Americans, have to put limits and borders [on] freedom of
speech,” and “A permissive approach to
hate speech is not a prerequisite to functioning democracy, On the contrary,
our European friends would argue that democracy is better served by banning
such material." The first quote is from radical cleric Mohammad Qatanani,
who leads one of the largest mosques in New Jersey the second is from liberal
pundit Peter Spiro. Point made. At least
Mitt Romney had the guts to stand up unapologetically for free speech, so
hopefully we will again have a President who believes in the 1st
amendment come January.
4)
Both see religious freedom as a threat. In
addition to character assassination and misrepresentation there is a strong push
to extend hate crimes laws to include many forms of noncompliant behavior (IE
homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of God and therefore morally reprehensible-
by some proposed standards that statement would make me a criminal not that
that would stop me from saying it.) Canada already has this type of hate crimes
legislation.in our own country the most sacred of all American rights and the
first amendment to our constitution has been cast carelessly aside in the name
of healthcare reform. By ordering Catholic and other religious institutions to
provide health care plans covering contraception and abortive agents, the God
given right of religious freedom was made subject to the whim of the secretary
of the Department of Health and Human services. Thanks to John Roberts and the
guys on the US Supreme Court we may well look to the onset of Obama-care as the
end of religious freedom. Of course Islamist countries deal with this by having
a state religion, Islam, and banning all others Liberals are content to do away
with Christian practice and symbols. Compare these stories: KABUL
- Ignoring an international outcry, Afghanistan's puritanical Taliban Islamic
militia began demolishing statues across the country on Thursday, including two
towering ancient stone Buddhas. Taliban Minister of Information and
Culture Qudratullah Jamal told AFP the destruction of scores of pre-Islamic
figures, designed to stop the worshipping of "false idols," had begun
throughout the country. He said militiamen started wrecking the almost
2,000-year-old Buddhist masterpieces in the central province of Bamiyan,
including the world's tallest standing Buddha measuring 50 meters (165 feet),
after sunrise. (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines.shtml?/headlines01/0301-04.htm)
and WASHINGTON — The 40-foot-tall
cross rises above the nearby shopping centers and neighborhoods, a local
landmark that for more than 80 years has served as a gateway to the Maryland
communities of Bladensburg and Hyattsville. The Memorial Peace Cross honors 49
men from Prince George’s County, Md., who lost their lives during World War I. Now
the American Humanist Association, a Washington-based group that represents
atheists and others, is calling for the cross’ removal, arguing that a
religious image on public land violates the constitutional principle of the
separation of church and state.
Read more here: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/09/15/2272594/debate-erupts-over-wwi-monument.html#storylink=cpy. You will get the point.
Read more here: http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/09/15/2272594/debate-erupts-over-wwi-monument.html#storylink=cpy. You will get the point.
5)
Both devalue human life. Islamists murder
apostates and Christians, they erupt into riotous bloodthirsty mobs at the drop
of a hat, they measure tactical victories by innocent deaths, and they strap
bombs on kids and blow them up in crowded theatres. Liberals consider any restriction on the murder
of the unborn as crime against woman, support euthanasia for the elderly and
handicapped (Terry Schiavo was murdered on these grounds) and assisted suicide.
6)
Both disrespect women. There is little doubt
that women in Islamist countries are second class citizens or worse. In some
countries woman can’t legally drive, some cannot testify in court cannot ride a
bus without a male relatives permission go out unescorted, can be convicted of
crimes at the testimony of a man, can be flogged for wearing pants or getting
raped. However we are told that Democrats OWN women’s issues in this land. Let
me be blunt ladies, liberals believe you to be so stupid and such sex objects
that you don’t care about the economy or defense, you’re not worried that
national debt is crushing your children’s future, woman do not care about those
who wish to stay home and raise their babies but are compelled to work due to
crushing tax burdens or the inability of the husbands to find gainful
employment. No, Ladies your votes can be
bought by free abortions and $9 worth of contraception. To the Islamist you are
chattel to the liberals you are useful idiots.
7)
Both prosper in times of economic chaos. The poverty
of the Middle East plays into the hands of the Islamist, just as the culture of
dependency plays into the hands of the liberals. Dependency is key, men lack
the strength to fight against the hand that holds the bread and controls the
flow of water and electricity. It does not behoove the Islamist for the people
of the middle east to leave their quasi 14th century existence, but
it does behoove the American liberal to stifle economic progress and to retard the
creation of wealth, to devastate the healthcare industry until panels of bureaucrats
make all healthcare decisions until 51% are too afraid to oppose the hand that
feeds them and thus keep and vote always for the party that controls their
dependency. If the liberals win one more
election we may well reach the point of no return.
Two forces threaten American liberty and the foundation of the
civil society. If we are to save it, then we must defeat both. One we must
fight with our armies, the other with our votes. If we lose to either we lose
it all. If I sound not politically correct,
well more than usual, it’s because time is short and I am angry at what is
happening to my country.
Next week I am probably going to lose friends but we must
press on as I address the concept of voting for the “lesser of two evils”.
