What is modern liberalism, a.k.a. progressivism?
It is the mindset that the unwashed masses are too stupid to govern themselves, and therefore need a nanny state to take care of them.
Given that understanding, it turns out that there is a nexus between Democrat Party liberals, liberal intellectuals and mainstream media liberals. It is the idea that “They need us. They need our superior understanding. They need us to tell them what to think.”
That attitude has one serious flaw, however.
These people are even dumber in their own way than the very unwashed ignorant masses they seek to manipulate. And whenever the culture becomes ignorant enough, or uncertain enough, that it begins to follow liberals, watch out; because the disaster of “dumb and dumber” is right around the corner.
Ronald Reagan put it best when he said, “The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn’t so.”
Progressives are people who “know” all sorts of things about American history that simply aren’t true. They “know” all sorts of things about our Constitution that simply aren’t true. They “know” all sorts of things about our economy that simply aren’t true.
From Flopping Aces:
Allegedly unintelligent Republicans make fools of Democrats
Posted by: DrJohn @ 11:35 am
It’s been quite the 24 hours.
Liberals just love trying to beat up on Sarah Palin. They repeatedly question her intelligence. And she just wipes the poop off the floor with them.
Mark Hemingway had a glorious article at the Washington Examiner and I am posting the whole thing:
So the Los Angeles Times reported on a recent Sarah Palin event:
Seeking to channel the sign-bearing, flag-waving enthusiasm of the “tea party” movement into ballot-box victories, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told hundreds of supporters Monday they couldn’t “party like it’s 1773″ until Washington was flooded with like-minded conservatives.
Immediately, Palin’s critics leapt into action. Here’s The Daily Kos himself on Twitter:
Sarah Palin to supporters: “Don’t party like it’s 1773 yet”. is.gd/g7rRb…. She’s so smart.
And here’s PBS’s Gwen Ifill, moderator of presidential debates, also on Twitter:
Sarah Palin: party like its 1773! ummm,
Blogger Cuffy Meigs rounds up all kinds of similar “HAHAHAHAHA! She’s so stupid!” reactions to Palin’s reference to 1773. So what did happen in 1773? Oh, right.
That, ummm, would be the Boston Tea Party.
Moulitsas and Ifill were in such an orgasm to insult Palin they stuck their feet not only into their mouths but up where the Sun doesn’t shine as well. Idiots.
Nicely done, Sarah.
Then there’s Christine O’Donnell and her debate with Chris Coons:
WILMINGTON, Del.—Republican Christine O’Donnell challenged her Democratic rival Tuesday to show where the Constitution requires separation of church and state, drawing swift criticism from her opponent, laughter from her law school audience and a quick defense from prominent conservatives.
“Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?” O’Donnell asked while Democrat Chris Coons, an attorney, sat a few feet away.
Coons responded that O’Donnell’s question “reveals her fundamental misunderstanding of what our Constitution is. … The First Amendment establishes a separation.”
But O’Donnell probed again.
She interrupted to say, “The First Amendment does? … So you’re telling me that the separation of church and state, the phrase ’separation of church and state,’ is in the First Amendment?”
That’s pretty clear. And as any Constitutional scholar should know, the phrase “separation of church and state” does not appear in the Constitution. O’Donnell was right, yet Ben Evans, the author of the piece, characterized the exchange as another controversy to “befall” O’Donnell.
Why is being right something that “befalls” someone? Because she’s a Republican?
Then Coons tried again to school O’Donnell.
“He noted again the First Amendment’s ban on establishment of religion” reported Evans.
(There is no ban on the establishment of religion in the Constitution.)
O’DONNELL: “Let me just clarify, you’re telling me that the separation of church and state is found in the First Amendment?”
COONS: “‘Government shall make no establishment of religion’”
O’DONNELL: “That’s in the First Amendment?”
For the record, the First Amendment says:
Amendment I: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Then a local law school professor chimed in:
Erin Daly, a Widener professor who specializes in constitutional law, said, “She seemed genuinely surprised that the principle of separation of church and state derives from the First Amendment, and I think to many of us in the law school that was a surprise.”
This is something I despise about both academicians and reporters. Liberal bias.
It’s pretty obvious that O’Donnell was being literal and it’s painfully clear that she was right on both counts. O’Donnell was surprised that Coons, Daly, Evans and the rest of the smug twits in the audience could actually believe that the phrase “separation of church and state” resides in the Constitution and that the Constitution bans the establishment of religion.
Entirely unreported by Evans was O’Donnell’s challenge to Coons:
O’Donnell was later able to score some points of her own off the remark, revisiting the issue to ask Coons if he could identify the “five freedoms guaranteed in the First Amendment.”
Coons named the separation of church and state, but could not identify the others — the freedoms of speech, press, to assemble and petition — and asked that O’Donnell allow the moderators ask the questions.
“I guess he can’t,” O’Donnell said.
Game, set, match- O’Donnell.
Another report of the debate went this way:
Ms. O’Donnell likened Mr. Coons’s position on evolution to those of “our so-called leaders in Washington” who have rejected the “indispensible principles of our founding.”
When Mr. Coons interjected that “one of those indispensible principles is the separation of church and state,” Ms. O’Donnell demanded, “Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?”
The audience exploded in laughter
One would have to say that an awful lot of law students overpaid for their education and that some law professors are overpaid.
George Orwell said that some ideas are so foolish that only an intellectual could believe them, for no ordinary man could be such a fool. And Thomas Sowell has pointed out that the record of 20th century intellectuals – precisely the period when liberals began to decide that only they properly qualified as “intellectuals” – was especially appalling in this regard.
Whenever a liberal talks – and frankly most of all when that liberal is an “intellectual” – you should listen very closely to whatever he or she says, and then believe the exact opposite.
The foolishness of liberals is literally biblical:
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools — Romans 1:22
For God’s wrath is being revealed from heaven against all the ungodliness and wickedness of those who in their wickedness suppress the truth — Romans 1:18
You love evil more than good, Falsehood more than speaking what is right — Psalm 52:3
But he who sins against Me injures himself; all those who hate Me love death — Proverbs 8:36
Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! — Isaiah 5:20
You who hate good and love evil, Who tear off their skin from them And their flesh from their bones — Micah 3:2
In their case, the god of this world has blinded the minds of those who do not believe to keep them from seeing the light of the glorious gospel of the Messiah, who is the image of God — 2 Corinthians 4:4
Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron — 1 Timothy 4:2
For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths — 2 Tim 4:3-4