| (September, 1996) |
No, really; I am.
Whenever I hear some sniveling leftist complaining about the "intolerant religous right" or the "fanatic pro-gun lobby" or "intolerant anti-choicers," I always think, "Hey they're talking about me again!" Now, those terms seem pretty harsh, and you may be wondering why I seem so cheerful about accepting them. But it's all about perception. You see, I understand what they really mean; you just have to know the language. Let explain.
When a sniveling leftist refers to a member of the "religous right," what they really mean is "someone who actually believes in God as He has revealed himself in the Bible, and votes." God is not a popular concept among sniveling leftists, and God-fearing people who vote are even less popular. Or how about "fanatic pro-gun lobby"? What that actually means is "someone who wants to protect himself, family and property." Also not a popular concept among sniveling leftists. A person who takes measures to protect himself with a gun implicitly denies that it is the government that has the primary responsibility of security; this conflicts with the sniveling leftist's ideas about expanding the role and reach of government. Finally, what of the term "anti-choicers"? That one's easy. That just means "someone who believes abortion is wrong." Usually it's tied in with the "religous right" concept. You see, "anti-choicers" simply believe that we are not God, and since we are not God we do not have the authority to decide who lives and who dies, and that "fetus" and "baby" are actually the same thing. If you're still confused, look up the word "infanticide" in the dictionary. "Anti-choice" members of the "religous right" think that's "wrong."
But that's not why I'm the kind of conservative that scares people. There are plenty of people that agree with me on the above concepts who only mildly disturb people. No, I scare people because my ideas about government go far beyond the above issues. When I start saying things like "Medicare and medicaid are outside the role of government and ought to be shut down" and "Social security is the only legal pyramid scheme in the country," well, people get downright nervous. Most people think those things are okay, ostensibly because they are supposed to going to benevolent programs, but I don't. You see, my mama taught me the word that means "taking something from someone without asking." It's called "stealing." And stealing, like abortion, is also "wrong."
But it doesn't end there; I could go on and on. Really, the reason I scare people is because I think we long ago met the founding fathers' definition of tyranny. George III never robbed and regulated the colonies the way the Federal Government does the States today. He never appropriated 1.7 million acres away from a colony the way Uncle Bill did from the State of Utah. The acts of King George and Parliament that caused the colonists to declare independence were only a fraction of what the national government does to us on a daily basis. And the worst thing about it is the American people don't seem to care. My observation is that years ago, a majority of the American people decided that the illusion of cradle-to-grave security, courtesy of an expanding Federal government and socially activist judiciary, was more important than the protection of individual liberty. And now, the Federal government is so big, the bureaucracies are so entrenched, and the idea of liberty has been replaced by security and license in so many people, that it will monumental undertaking to reverse the rot caused by modern liberalism.
But I think it can be done. We can start doing by voting Republican in November.
.......