As an implacable enemy of liberals and Democrats, I have often been asked my opinion of the difference between Republicans and Democrats.<\/p>\n
Although there are many differences, depending on the issue at hand, I see one major difference that covers a multitude of sins.\u00a0 It all has to do with human nature and the way in which people of differing political ideologies either exploit it or respond to it.<\/p>\n
Conservatives and Republicans understand human nature.\u00a0 Consequently, in everything they do in terms of government programs and public policy initiatives, they always attempt as much as possible to insure that human nature doesn\u2019t become a negative.\u00a0 Understanding that human nature will invariably tempt some to cut corners, taking advantage of opportunities to enrich themselves at the expense of others, Republicans can always be trusted to close loopholes in advance to prevent that from happening.<\/p>\n
Conversely, liberals and Democrats also understand human nature.\u00a0 However, in everything they attempt to do in terms of government programs and public policy initiatives, they can always be counted upon to create loopholes, taking advantage of the seamier side of human nature.\u00a0 It is an article of faith among Democrats that, if they can\u2019t attract adherents intellectually with solid arguments to support their leftist agenda, the only thing left to do is to buy as many votes as they can\u2026 with other people\u2019s money, of course.<\/p>\n
However, while the difference between conservatives and liberals and between Republicans and Democrats is an important consideration, a more important question\u2026 far more important to the future of our republic\u2026 is the difference between rank-and-file Democrats and the liberal elites who do their thinking for them.\u00a0 This dichotomy was the subject of a recent telephone debate between Rush Limbaugh and a conservative caller named Jennifer, from Lancaster, Ohio.\u00a0 In order to accurately relate the specifics of their debate, I will quote extensively from the transcript of their conversation.\u00a0 She had two points to make:<\/p>\n
First, she referred to an earlier sound byte in which a liberal caller had accused Rush of not really believing the things he said, saying that Rush only says the things he says in order to \u201cgin up\u201d his audience.\u00a0 She went on to say that what the liberal caller accused Rush of doing is precisely what liberals themselves do.\u00a0 It was a classic case of ideological projection.\u00a0 The liberal caller was merely projecting onto Rush the fact that liberals rarely believe what they claim to believe.\u00a0 She explained that it\u2019s \u201cjust part of their script\u2026 part of their shtick<\/i>\u2026 part of their spiel<\/i>.\u201d<\/p>\n
Her opinion was that liberals and Democrats, being unable to recognize the difference between firmly held beliefs and things that are said only to tell listeners what we think they wish to hear, simply assume that conservatives and Republicans are equally as duplicitous as they are.<\/p>\n
Finally, she recalled a point articulated by a caller several weeks earlier.\u00a0 That caller argued that, when individuals have firmly held beliefs, they not only accept those beliefs as part of who they are, they give others the freedom to hold differing opinions.\u00a0 They\u2019re not concerned when others disagree with them because they are secure in their own beliefs.<\/p>\n
She went on to explain that most liberals, particularly rank-and-file Democrats, really don\u2019t have firmly-held beliefs.\u00a0 Instead, they are constantly bullied and pressured by their liberal elites into adopting politically correct positions.\u00a0 And because they are constantly forced to yield to what is politically correct<\/i>, in spite of whatever partially-formed views they may have, they become very angry when confronted by conservatives and Republicans who have well-founded and firmly-held beliefs.\u00a0 And since we conservatives believe what we believe and refuse to compromise our values as they do, their only alternative is anger, name-calling, and character assassination.<\/p>\n
Rush was not in total agreement.\u00a0 He argued that there are varying degrees and kinds of liberals: a) the ideologues, b) the leaders, and c) the rank-and-file who are just trying to be cool, trying to be \u201chip.\u201d\u00a0 He argued that, in every liberal constituency, there are varying degrees of conviction, but that a great many liberals actually believe everything they say.<\/p>\n
The caller argued that, yes, there are liberals and Democrats who believe everything they say, but they represent only a tiny fraction of the political left.\u00a0 Instead, most rank-and-file liberals and Democrats go along to get along because they can\u2019t handle the pressure of what is anathema to leftists: the agonizing social stigma associated with appearing to be different<\/i>.<\/p>\n
In response, Rush agreed that, particularly among young people, the peer pressure to support gay rights, to be pro-choice and support abortion, and to support other articles of liberal orthodoxy is intense.\u00a0 He said, \u201cWhatever they think the majority opinion is on something they’ll go with it and take the path of least resonance, which is essentially what you\u2019re saying they do.\u00a0 And then, when it comes time for them to explain what they believe, they can\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n
He also agreed that, \u201cIf you are totally confident in what you believe, you don\u2019t care\u2026 bring \u2018em on. \u00a0You\u2019ll be glad to take a shot at it and try to change their mind. \u00a0Or you\u2019ll be happy to tell them why you think what you think.\u00a0 Leftists don\u2019t want to go there. \u00a0They can\u2019t go there because they can\u2019t explain.\u00a0 All they want to do is silence any opposition.\u201d<\/p>\n
Rush argued, \u201cHere\u2019s the risk that we\u2019re running if you think they don’t really believe\u2026 I think that it\u2019d be much easier to change their minds if they really didn\u2019t believe it.\u00a0 I think it\u2019s a little bit more complicated than this.\u00a0 I mean, there\u2019s a massive desire on the part of the left to just shut up people who don\u2019t agree with them.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut nevertheless, when you are going to posit the opinion (that) liberals don\u2019t really believe what they (say they) believe, that\u2019s dangerous\u2026 Let’s put it this way: It makes them sound a little bit more harmless than they are, and I don\u2019t think it\u2019s accurate to say they don\u2019t believe it.\u00a0 Now, I understand with certain levels of liberalism, you\u2019ve got the low-information (voters).\u00a0 I think the low-information voting bloc out there is not even ideological.\u00a0 The low-information (people), they\u2019re just like one of my dogs.\u201d<\/p>\n
The caller replied, \u201cThat\u2019s part of my point.\u00a0 Not only can they not articulate their position because they truly don\u2019t have one\u2026 they\u2019re just accepting, caving to pressure\u2026 not just being unable to articulate their point, but truly being angry\u2026 I think that anger comes not from a righteous indignation\u2026 they don’t understand that there can be differences of opinion, and that\u2019s (the source of) their anger.<\/p>\n
The caller conceded that what Rush said about the hard core leftists… which Rush estimated to be about 3% of the Democrat Party… is true.\u00a0 They truly believe what they say.\u00a0 However, she argued that the millenials are another matter.\u00a0 She said, \u201cI see so many of these memes on Facebook from the millennials and they\u2019ll go straight from a conservative meme to a leftist, left-leaning meme, and I\u2019m like, \u2018You don\u2019t even understand both sides of the issue.\u00a0 You\u2019re here, but you can\u2019t argue both sides of it.\u00a0 You really don\u2019t know.\u2019\u00a0 They buy into the low-information argument and\u2026 they really can\u2019t articulate it.\u201d<\/p>\n
I don\u2019t often disagree with Rush Limbaugh, but in this instance I must because his caller was right.\u00a0 The vast majority of Democratic voters haven\u2019t the foggiest notion of why they vote as they do.\u00a0 And if we were to ask them to explain themselves we can be sure that we would very quickly be the target of an angry outburst and, at the very least, our parentage would be called into question.\u00a0 Unfortunately, that is the state of politics in America in the 20th<\/sup> and 21st<\/sup> centuries.<\/p>\n When\u00a0 Barack Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, and other Democrats propose, for example, that the Congress increase the minimum wage from $7.25 per hour to $10.10, a 39.3% increase, they know that the increase would reduce the number of entry-level jobs by at least 15%, doing the greatest damage to job prospects for minority teens.\u00a0 Yet, they sell the idea to their low-information voter base as if the law of supply-and-demand had been repealed.<\/p>\n I\u2019m sure that Barack Obama, as he faces Mecca and kneels on his prayer rug at bedtime each night, thanks Allah for political correctness.\u00a0 Why?\u00a0 Because, without political correctness, he could never have been elected and the Democrat Party could not exist.\u00a0 He is the principal beneficiary of the ignorance of the masses and he\u2019ll never do anything to change that.<\/p>\n In his May 23 Watters World<\/i> segment on Fox News, O\u2019Reilly Factor <\/i>producer Jesse Watters questioned twelve Obama voters on the streets of Philadelphia.\u00a0 Watters asked each of them five questions: 1) What is the significance of the thirteen stripes on the U.S. flag?\u00a0 2) How many senators are there in the U.S. Senate?\u00a0 3) What economic system does the U.S. utilize?\u00a0 4) Who was president of the United States during World War II? And 5) In what month do we hold our General Elections?\u00a0 Of the twelve Obama voters quizzed, only one could answer all five questions correctly, and only three others were able to answer at least three correctly.<\/p>\n On one hand, it\u2019s easy to be a Democrat because it\u2019s not necessary to spend a great deal of time and effort studying the issues, figuring out what\u2019s right and what\u2019s wrong, and determining how each of us might be personally impacted by various laws and regulations.\u00a0 All that is required of them is that they vote exactly as party leaders and union leaders dictate.<\/p>\n On the other hand, it\u2019s not easy being a Democrat because of the terrible frustration associated with being unable to justify one\u2019s fidelity to a cause one doesn\u2019t understand and can never defend.\u00a0 To conservatives and Republicans, being a Democrat might look like a no-brainer, but it\u2019s not as easy as it looks.\u00a0 As John Wayne once remarked in the movie, Sands of Iwo Jima<\/i>, \u201cLife is tough, but it\u2019s a lot tougher when you\u2019re stupid.<\/a>\u201d<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" As an implacable enemy of liberals and Democrats, I have often been asked my opinion of the difference between Republicans and Democrats. Although there are many differences, depending on the issue at hand, I see one major difference that covers … Continue reading