As a conservative, it has been very difficult for me to understand where my liberal friends are coming from. I don't know about you, but if we can't figure out where they got their strange view of the world, there will be no way to guide them back to reality. In prior Blogs, I have touched on ideas about exactly who these people are and where they might have picked up their strange ideas. In this Blog, I am going to try to add some more ideas.
For most of my life, I did not know there was such a thing as a liberal. In the community that I lived within, the only really strange people who I had any contact with were preachers. I spent a lot of time trying to figure these strange people out. Over the years, I have added to my understanding of them. We all know of the many examples of preachers going over the edge. If there are this many going over the edge, you have to ask, "how many are still in the business, but are near the edge?" I don't know if you know this or not, but Jerry Brown went to Santa Clara University to become a Catholic preacher. He later got an itch in his pants and concluded that he was not cut out to be a preacher and went into liberal politics. There was this other guy, Gary Hart, who was running for President when Clinton was running who also first planned to be a preacher, but changed to liberal politics. He was the one who had all the pictures with the bimbos on the boat. My conclusion is that people who become preachers or who give serious consideration to it are strange people. I know that many of you know preachers who seem normal, but have been disappointed to find out that they like to touch little boys. I don't think we are talking about normal people here. I don't think that becoming a preacher makes a person strange, it is just that many strange people decide to become preachers.
How does all this have anything to do with liberals? I'm getting to that. I think that many of the people who become or consider becoming a preacher feel that they want to "help" people. This is the seed that I feel I have been looking for. Think about the person who wants to be a Boy Scout leader or a baseball coach. What all these people have in common is that they want to "help" people. First they have to have a mind set that they are capable of helping someone. Now think about that. If you want to coach the baseball team, you would have to know how to play baseball. With me so far? Not only do you have to know how to play baseball, but you have to feel that you know more about baseball than the people who you are coaching. Now we are getting some place. Isn't this exactly the same for preachers? Thinking that you know more tends to give a person a sense of superiority. Are you thinking about Obama? This is the common thread that seems to run thru most liberals. We have two kinds of liberals, the ones who are active and those who go along for the ride. The ones who I am talking about here are the active ones.
When I was in high school, I belonged to a club called, "Teachers for Tomorrow". I never went to any teachers college, but I was a college professor for 4 years at one time. When I look back at that high school group, most were smarter than average and seemed to be self appointed to be teaching do-gooders. I noticed that the ones who had a better grasp of reality left teaching soon after college and got normal jobs. The others stayed behind in teaching and became more liberal over time. Notice how both preachers and teachers have this common thread of being do-gooders.
Try this one. Remember when the Spanish invaded the new world and were taking ship loads of gold back to Spain? If a liberal were to walk upon the docks in Spain and see a big chest full of gold coins, what do you think they would think? Here is what. They would see all that gold and think about all the food that they could buy and give to the poor in Spain rather than let the chest of gold be taken by the King. They would feel that they would be praised by the poor for giving them food. Isn't this what we have right here in the USA right now? What would a conservative do on seeing the chest of gold? He would see that the gold was stolen from the Indians in the New World and ask that it be returned to its original owner. Isn't it interesting? Liberals want to give your money, not theirs to the poor, where as, conservatives give their own money. For many people this fact is confusing. When people like Buffet or Gates give money to social causes, it is "not" equivalent to giving public tax money to social causes. Often we hear that it is the same. We hear people and even Buffet or Gates saying that paying more tax is fine. For Buffet and Gates, the results are the same. More money goes to social causes, but it is very different. Ask Buffet and Gates what they would have thought, if when they were starting to build their companies, if the government took the money from them by taxation and gave it to social causes. I hope that I made this clear.
I feel that we have to keep a close eye on do-gooders of all colors, preachers, teachedrs, polititicans and wealthy people. These people are out of touch with the reality of most of us working people who only what to be judged on our own merit. We don't feel that we are better than anyone else and want our government to treat everyone equally. There is no such thing as a middle class. Everyone is in transition up and down economically. The people in the so called middle class is not a static group. Liberals seem to see every thing as a static zero sum game.
Down deep, are active liberals just do-gooders?
PS, Non-active liberals or followers are really just "free loaders" and we know how to deal with them.
