The Emotion of Liberalism
We as humans are amazingly susceptible to an emotional argument. Its in our nature. When we hear of injustice, we want to right it. When we hear of someone being trodden underfoot, we want to help them. But when it comes to running this country, emotions should not rule the day. Had emotions ruled in the summer of 1945, we would never have had the courage to end the war swiftly and decisively as we did in Japan. Had emotions ruled in 1961, the Cuban Missile Crisis would have undoubtedly ended tragically. Had emotions ruled after September 11, Afghanistan would be still be experiencing radioactive fallout from our barrage of atomic weaponry. No, emotions have no ruling place in governing the United States.
And yet Democrats insist on making the most emotionally charged arguments and statements in their daily political diatribes. Why? Because their carefully crafted language and focus-grouped statements are designed to immediately resonate with our emotional nature as humans. A quick response or snap judgment after hearing their claims would result in absolutely siding with their ideology. But, a careful and logical analysis of facts generally leads you away from such emotionally charged reasoning.
But Democrats insist on pandering to our emotional nature. Take for instance President Bush’s recent use of the 1978 law signed by Jimmy Carter allowing the President the power of non-court ordered wiretaps for purposes of foreign intelligence. Carter, Regan and Clinton all used this law and anyone with an Internet connection can find the law and read it for themselves.
The point is that when possible, todays Democrats make political hay over things that initially sound bad. Thats why you hear them shouting racism, civil rights, abuse and torture at every intellectually dishonest opportunity. These words invoke a negative visceral response that if left uninvestigated, will create a mental idea.
Of course torture is bad. We should not torture people. The problem is the definition of torture is too sensitive. The list that Dick Durban read sounds nothing like what happened to Vietnam POWs or Soviet political prisoners or Iraqi citizens under Saddam. We think of torture as something that we saw in the movie SE7EN or something that we saw on CSI, but in reality, the good men and women of the United States military do nothing of the sort. Being interrogated by a woman is not torture. Making someone stand for long periods of time is physically demanding, but it is a long way from torture. Even the false allegations of flushing the Koran down the toilet is not torture. In fact, since the government is a-religious it may as well have been flushing the phonebook for Carthage, MS, down the toilet and the greatest crime there would be the waste of water. But as far as America is concerned, it should make no difference if we flushed any religious document down the toilet. We have a firm separation of church and state in this country, you know. It tacitly prevents us from accepting, tolerating or respecting any religion. So flush away, right?
Torture should be defined as something like cutting off an ear or finger, breaking bones and other things that have severe long-term complications. If it will save one American life, then its worth it to super-cool a few terrorists who would cut off your childrens heads if given the chance.
Recently the Dems began shouting The President is using unauthorized wiretaps to spy on American citizens and calling for investigations. Demanding that the accusation is serious enough that it warrants an investigation regardless of the evidence or basis for the accusation. They also are well aware of previous administrations using the same legal justification to watch people who threaten our security. Its nothing new. Carter approved the same measures in 1979, and Clinton approved similar measures in 1994 and 1995. Only now, its just negative to the President and emotionally charged, so theyre all but willing to jump on board and ride this current tide of emotion until it ebbs.
(As another side note. Remember all the media uproar about Clintons wiretaps? Unbiased media?)
Instead of being honest with the American people and saying that we had somewhat faulty intelligence on parts of Iraqs weapon programs (insert another debate here about honesty in reporting) Democrats begin shouting Bush lied, Bush lied because most people believe that lying is bad. Never mind the intelligence services across the world had, believed and implemented policy based on the same intelligence. And forget the fact that Democrats were resoundingly for dethroning Saddam until Howard Dean shifted the tide of popularity against the war among Democrats in 2004. Since then, every hard line Democrat has gotten onboard. Why? It plays on our emotions of soldiers dying, and nobody wants that.
(As a side note, hear much about Joe Liebermans stand on the war? How about Johns Kerry and Kennedy? Unbiased Media?)
They use this tactic because they realize that most Americans dont care about politics. Those that care somewhat and do vote, but dont investigate things for themselves will remember these charges and the investigations that they called for but since the media doesnt report the results when they are benign most people dont get the full story. These intellectually dishonest tactics point to one thing: the Democrats will do anything to stay in power. They will manipulate the truth and public opinion to stay in power. Check your brain at the door and let your gut do your thinking for you and youll love liberalism. Be willing to do the tough thing and investigate, read, think and youll quickly see that conservatism is for you.