HOW TO BE A GOOD LIBERAL

In order to be a good liberal you have to believe...


that there were no charities before welfare,

that there was no art before federal funding,

that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high,

You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach 4th graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.

6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial but being homosexual is natural.

0. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.

11. You have to believe the military, not corrupt politicians, start wars.

that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding,

that taxing the use of gasoline or other energy will reduce the use of gasoline or other energy, but taxing work and investment will not reduce work and investment,

that a man's home is his castle only until the city condemns it so a politician's developer-crony can build a high tax-paying shopping mall there (which would be for "the public good"),

that private property rights are morally repugnant because they are based on selfishness,

that the right to the pursuit of happiness is also morally repugnant because it too is selfish,

that bigotry and prejudice are evil unless they're against selfish bastards, in which case they're good,

that honest hard-working people who want to spend their money on their own damn families and businessess must be lumped-in with criminals so we can feel self-righteous about despising them as if they were the exact same kind of selfish bastards as criminals,

that the best ideas are more government intervention in the economy, more aggressive confiscation of private property, more government funding of socially destructive behavior, and a foreign policy subordinated to world opinion,

that freedom of speech and of the press does NOT apply to TV, radio, cell phones, PDAs or the internet which must all be government-regulated to enforce our ideas of "access" and "fairness",

that whenever there is a question about the purposes and motivations of the United States, one must assume -- no, make that believe -- the worst,

that the United States must not make the decision to defend itself by itself; it must first get permission from the U.N.,

that the only people worthy of being a leader, especially president, are those who display our definition of intelligence, which is: showing signs of being an analytical, reflective, self-doubting, slow-acting intellectual who accepts, and adheres religiously to, modern liberal doctrines, including the following:

that all generalizations are false,

that there are absolutely no absolutes,

that you can be sure that nothing is certain,

that it's really bad, even evil, to make or pronounce moral judgments,

that all cultures are equal, but ours stinks; that all truth is relative, except the unquestionable truth of "post-modernism", that no race, class or gender is superior, but middle class white males are clearly inferior, that no books are superior, except, of course, those by third-world authors,

that it's good to support minority, homosexual and women's rights and simultaneously make common cause with Islamofacists, who would attack all of them,

that identifying individuals by their uniqueness is "racist," but identifying them only as a member of a race is not,

that those who oppose liberalism, nomatter how thoughtful or scholarly, can be dismissed out of hand simply by calling them "racist, sexist, fascist homophobes," because, after all, they have to be such, don't they?

that the independent broadcasters who give us 500+ TV channels can't deliver the quality that PBS does,

that good economies are caused by politicians and not by entrepreneurs,

that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity,

that farmers, ranchers, hunters and fishermen don't care about nature and the long-term survival of species, but "animal rights" activists who've never been outside the city do,

that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical, documented changes in the earth's climate and in the cycles of the sun, and more affected by yuppies driving SUVs,

that people who drive cars are bad, but people who ride buses or trains are good,

that people who live in single-family homes (or want to) are bad, but people who live in high-density apartments (or admit they ought to) are good,

that the thinning of forests by lumber companies and forestry workers "destroys habitat," while burning them down in their entirety by allowing unhindered forest fires makes animals "thrive,"

that American corporations' drilling for oil in "environmentally sensitive" areas is bad, but paying billions of dollars to moslem countries for their oil is better,

that the entire earth is an "environmentally sensitive" area, so no development, drilling, or building of any kind is justifiable ANYwhere,

that Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, George Washington Carver or Thomas Edison

that any person or any country which has a higher standard of living than any other must have achieved it as a matter of luck, not freedom, opportunity, foresight and work -- and must feel guilty about it -- but if they're not, they must be forced to "pay" for their good fortune in a manner which we (who feel guilty for them anyway) will decide is best,

that there is only one moral code, and it is the pure altruism of the self-sacrifice: first-foremost-only-and-always kind,

that the only people who should decide which sacrifices anyone must make are the ones in government,

that the correct view of the state is one that sees citizens as children who need nurturing, and bureaucrats and politicians as the only adults who can do the nurturing,

that private citizens should not be allowed to choose their doctors, their childrens' schools, where they live, what foods they eat, where and if they smoke, and when they speak or write: which "politically correct" words they may use and which "incorrect" ones they may not -- without your help,

that there is no such thing as a "sovereign citizen." In fact, there is no such thing as "inalienable rights," only permissions from government,

that everything not forbidden should be mandatory, and everything not mandatory should be forbidden,

that trial lawyers are selfless heroes and doctors are overpaid,

that Robin Hood should be remembered for "robbing the rich to give to the poor" (because that was "good"), even though it wasn't his motive, and not for "taking back from the taxors and giving back to the taxees" (because that's always bad), even though it was,

that recessions and depressions are caused by businessmen, and not by politicians and bureaucrats,

that it would be vastly preferably to risk destroying the economy of the United States even in wartime than to allow drilling in areas which might risk the well-being of wildlife,

that FDR must be remembered for "ending the great depression," even though he didn't (in fact he made it worse), and for giving half the people "hope," even though he decimated the Constitution and gave the other half despair,

that the explosions in medical and prescription drug costs since 1965 have been caused by greedy doctors and drug companies and not by medicare, HMO subsidies and labyrinthine government regulations,

that you can acquire self-esteem without actually doing something to earn it or living up to a code of ethics,

that public schools must be given ever-more money and protection from competition, no matter how poorly they perform,

that intolerance may be horrible, but "zero tolerance" is wonderful,

that social changes must be made by classroom propaganda and coercion, not by persuasion, and certainly NOT by example,

that it is racist to be color-blind and that good policy is to be color conscious -- in fact to identify people ONLY as a member of a group,

that all cultures are precious, must be preserved at all costs, and must all be treated as equal, not because of their outcomes, but because we say so,

that the new ideal paradigm to be established is "multi-cultural diversity", which means making sure every organization has at least one black liberal, one militant-feminist liberal, one gay liberal, one Latino liberal, one transgender liberal, one Native American liberal, and so forth. The one kind of diversity NOT permitted is diversity of philosophy, politics, views or values (especially merit- or accomplishment-consciousness),

that, since hatred is horrible, it's okay to hate haters. And independent people. And SUV-owners. And gun owners. And business people. And the merit-conscious. And other individualists. And any other politically incorrect policy advocates. And whoever else it's chic to hate today. In fact the new definition of "hater" is "anyone who disagrees with us."

that if a private person or organization refuses to sponsor, finance, allow or provide a venue for, a speaker, movie maker or demonstration, then that's "censorship," and that's bad, but if a government or government-run enterprise does it, then that's quelling "hate speech,"and that's good,

that it's shocking -- and worthy of detailed, damning and deliciously horrifying exposés -- to find that free-market scholars are actually able to fund their work with voluntary donations from wealthy individuals and businesses -- while it's pleasing to find that socialist scholars are able to fund their work "virtuously" with tax money (extracted from their opponents -- and victims -- by government coercion),

that CHANGE is good -- but ONLY so long as it is change TO liberal values FROM other values,

that people who resist your vision of social change should be jailed,

that everyone who believes in free markets is a religious conservative (or if we know better, we pretend we don't -- since we don't want the general public to know about libertarians),

that everyone who believes in civil liberties is a big-government liberal (or if we know better, we still don't want the general public to know about libertarians),

that the ancient left-right political spectrum must be defended as the only yardstick for evaluating ideologies because (unlike the Nolan Chart, for example) the old left-right one conveniently implies that "the democratic ideal" is nothing more than a compromise between socialism and fascism, and so the ONLY question is "WHAT KIND of huge, powerful, all-pervasive government do you want?",

that black people can't succeed without your help, but those who do, or tell others they can, must be vilified as "Uncle Toms,"

that the NRA is bad, because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good, because it supports certain parts of the Constitution,

that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese communists,

that more people are killed by guns than are saved by gun owners simply brandishing their weapons,

that even though there are 54,000,000 children under 16 in the U.S., and you can never achieve "zero" accidental deaths from drowning, choking, fires, falls, poisoning, motor vehicles and medical mistakes, you can somehow achieve zero from firearm accidents (perhaps because there are always so many fewer such accidents every year),

that it's possible to develop a system to identify and locate absolutely all random suicide bombers so they can be stopped before they strike, but it's impossible to develop a system to identify, locate and shoot down incoming missiles before they do,
that corporations are more dangerous than governments -- even when they haven't been sold a government-protected monopoly and can't make you buy from them, and even though the federal government is hundreds of times the size of the largest corporations and has guns, jails, IRS kangaroo courts, and can and does make you buy from it or deal with it,

that the quantity of natural resources in all of existence remains finite, and will always run out unless government controls its use and mandates horse-and-buggy "substitutes",

that the quantity of wealth in all of existence remains fixed, and always has from time immemorial, so only people in government should decide how it's allocated,

that any attempt to tax successful entrepreneurs at less than 100% of their incomes must be met with horrified screams of "giveaway! giveaway!! giveaway!!!"

that businessmen are parasites, but politicians and bureaucrats are not,

that people who work in the private sector are evil, but people who work in government are saints,

that a contract can mean anything any time anybody wants it to, especially if it's named "The Constitution of the United States",

that private citizens are too stupid to make their own decisions about anything, but people in government are too smart not to give them dictatorial powers over everything,

that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried, is because "the right people" haven't been in charge,

that the only answer to the millions of problems caused by government -- is always ... ("ta-da!") more government (of course!),

that the only choices Americans are given by the Republicans and Democrats include having to choose between legal abortions and "overkill" security from international terrorists (ignoring the fact that Libertarians support BOTH Constitutional security measures and states' rights to legalize or outlaw abortions),

that contributions to the Democratic Party by the Chinese Communists are in the best interests of the United States,

that both "hard" and "soft"-money contributions to the campaigns of politicans by Americans are not in the best interests of the United States because they are always initiated by the donors as bribes and never by the politicians as a "protection racket,"

that people who get upset about the misuse of the FBI, the military, the BATF and the IRS belong in jail, but that the misusers, liars and Constitution- violators belong in the White House,

that William J. Clinton, as a wonderful president, should not be remembered for any misdeeds at all, but if he is, it should be only for the sexual ones, and not for any of those other things,*

that Hillary Clinton is normal and really a very nice person,
that the death penalty is bad, yet abortion is good

that it would better to see civilization destroyed than to see your cherished beliefs in cultural equivalency and moral ambivalence dismissed,
that you must be a knee-jerk "pass a law!" big-government control-freak in order to get any poor people or any "good" people -- especially the professionally unselfish "saintly" people -- to even like you, let alone to love you,

and last, but definitely not least -- that good intentions are all that are needed to pave the way to utopia, especially if all your friends have the same good intentions.

====================