Why Dogs, Not Liberals, Are Man's Best Friend
Burt Prelutsky
Monday, November 17, 2008Some people
are convinced that a compassionate conservative is an oxymoron. But, I
know better. I'm not suggesting I am one, but I do know a few. They're
the people who occasionally take me to task for being too critical of
liberals.
They'll insist that some of their best friends are liberals.
Liberals, they'll inform me, make fine neighbors and positively
first-rate relatives. I patiently explain that they're preaching to the
choir. I know first-hand that liberals can be all of those things, and
more.
My only problem with liberals is that they're hypocrites and they
can't help lying.
Perhaps, like my friends, you now think I'm too harsh in my judgment.
On the contrary, I think I tend to give liberals the benefit of the
doubt. I happen to believe they are so besotted by their emotions that
they can't help painting themselves into indefensible corners. To blame
a liberal for lying and blatant hypocrisy would be as heartless as
blaming an alcoholic for drinking. In fact, I suspect that, like
alcoholics, liberals suffer from a chemical imbalance. Otherwise, how
would you explain the enormous gulf between what they say and what they
do?
For instance, how often have we read newspaper editorials arguing for
Affirmative Action in schools and in the work place? In most cases,
those pieces are not being written or edited by members of a racial
minority group. So, if they were sincere, shouldn't these journalists
clear out their desks and surrender their jobs to somewhat less
qualified, but far more deserving, blacks and Hispanics?
Or consider, if you will, how consistently liberals object to tax
cuts. They prattle on incessantly about how much the wealthy benefit,
ignoring the logic that if there's a 10% reduction across the board, it
figures that the person who pays more will save more. But, when liberals
blather about the inequities of tax cuts, you realize they actually
believe that if a millionaire saves fifty thousand on his tax bill, the
guy who only earns, say, thirty grand-a-year should get the same return!
Liberals, for reasons that some of us will never comprehend, are
convinced that the federal government can be trusted to spend money more
wisely than the people who actually earn it. When Bill Clinton was in
the White House, he said as much.
They're entitled to their beliefs, you say. Where does the
inconsistency come in, you ask? It's simply this -- liberals spend just
as much money as conservatives on shrewd attorneys and clever C.P.A.'s,
attempting to lower their own tax liability. There is nothing in the tax
laws, after all, that prohibits an American citizen from paying Uncle
Sam more than he owes. But, I have yet to hear of a liberal, even one as
rich as George Soros, who claimed that, even though he belonged in the
highest bracket, he so admired the way in which Congress spent his
money, he was going to send the I.R.S. 70 or maybe even 80 percent of
his earnings.
Finally, I have never heard a liberal speak out in favor of school
vouchers. Instead, they wave the flag for public schools, even though
everybody in his right mind knows that, in spite of the No Child Left
Behind program, a majority of public schools in America are a disgrace.
The system has routinely passed along youngsters who wound up graduating
from high school lacking self-discipline and even rudimentary math and
reading skills. Yet, every liberal in Congress can be counted on to pay
lip service to public education, although not one of them has a child
enrolled in the Washington, D.C., school system!
So, while I acknowledge that liberals can be as loyal and steadfast
as cocker spaniels, I have found it is nearly impossible to paper-train
them.
Copyright © 2008 Salem Web Network. All Rights Reserved.
|