Sunday, February 11, 2007

Dr. Sanity Is Right

This is not the first time Dr. Sanity has nailed the Left...

Dr. Sanity

Shining a psychological spotlight on a few of the insanities of life
Saturday, February 10, 2007


Rarely do you find an example that so clearly demonstrates the real agenda of the neo-marxist fascism of today's political left.

In "The Four Pillars of the Socialist Revival", I identified four key epistemological and ethical strategies that provide the foundation of the ideological agenda of the socialist and communist remnants aggressively pursuing power in the 21st century.

They are:

*Radical Environmentalism - ("humans are behind the imminent disaster of global warming and only aggressive government intervention can prevent disaster")

*Political Correctness - ("reality, truth and morality are all subjective")

*Multiculturalism - ("all cultures are equally good except for western culture which is uniquely bad; who are we to say that freedom and democracy are any better than tyranny and oppression?")

*Terrorism - ("terrorism is the only option of those who are oppressed by the western imperialist capitalists and is perfectly justified. George Bush/America/the West is the real terrorist")

A big h/t to Dr Sanity

Go read her whole post:

**And while I'm on the subject, here is more of the Leftists attack on our freedom:**

Thought Police Strike Again

Newest 'Hate Crime' Bill Violates Constitution: Attempts End-Run Around Free Speech

h/t -
February 5, 2007

Lancaster, PA: The Constitution Party, the country's third largest political party in terms of voter registration, warns Americans that the latest federal 'hate-crime' bill introduced in the House of Representatives is a dangerous threat to Constitutionally protected rights. H.R. 254, introduced by Rep. Sheila Jackson-Lee, D-Texas, is another version of proposed legislation passed by the House in 2005 and the Senate in 2004. Only strong public outcry and a Republican controlled Congress kept this type of legislation from becoming law. Now that Democrats are in charge there's a tough fight ahead to keep this dangerous bill from passing. H.R. 254 would make certain types of speech a federal offense. So-called 'hate crimes' legislation is dangerous for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the blatant unconstitutionality of such laws. 'Hate crime' laws would allow federal "thought police" to interfere in the law enforcement authority of states and localities - something our founders were clear was NOT to be allowed.

H.R. 254 would require every state to pass and enforce 'anti-hate' laws. It would outlaw stating a "bias" against certain 'federally protected' groups such as homosexuals. Constitution Party National Chairman Jim Clymer warned "So-called 'hate crime' laws could mean the Bible would be considered 'hate literature' and preaching from it would be 'hate speech' because of references to religious teachings on homosexuality or other behaviors. The Orwellian implications of these types of laws mean Bible-believing Christians could become criminals simply because they spoke out about their beliefs."

Citing a 2004 case in Philadelphia, where 11 Christians were charged under a 'hate-crimes' statute for peacefully protesting at a gay rights rally, Mr. Clymer, a practicing attorney, said "Law-abiding Americans became criminals because they exercised a right our forebears fought and died for". "By introducing the Anti-Defamation League's (ADL) federal 'hate crime' bill into Congress for the second time, Rep. Jackson-Lee shows she's bound and determined to stifle your First Amendment Rights no matter how many times she has to make a run at it", noted Constitution Party Communication Director Mary Starrett who added: "The Constitution Party condemns H.R. 254 as an affront to our liberty. Today, ADL-inspired 'thought crime' laws are stripping nations of free speech.

"In Canada and many European countries, it is a crime to use the internet to criticize 'federally protected' groups, such as homosexuals and Muslims. In England, two men who called Islam 'wicked' were indicted under Britain's 'hate crime' law and now face seven years in prison. Those horrors do not belong in America!"

Referring to the group behind this bill, Clymer noted: "Congresswoman Jackson-Lee's H.R. 254 is being pushed by the same group, ADL, responsible for the British law that says truth cannot be used as a defense in court. only the complaints by members of specially protected groups who say their feelings have been hurt are being allowed. The reality of what these types of laws are doing and have done to people across the world should be a chilling reminder to Americans to oppose these laws while we still can" warned Clymer.

This is not about some gay boys' rights. Truth be told, in my day they were called 'queers', because such outlandish, decadent behavior was not tolerated. Full stop. Ok, today's world is different, more accepting and tolerant, right? Then answer me this. If the world is such a tolerant and accepting place today, why is it that the dangers of self-censorship can be seen throughout all of the science disciplines, the media, publishers of books and magazines, writers, journalists (not necessarily two different animals), teachers, law enforcement, and yes, politicians? Self-censorship invades our conversations with peers, our behavior among strangers, and certainly to an increasing extent, in the blogging world - as witnessed in YouTube's zealous active censorship of what it considers objectionable.

What is the net result of all this self-correcting, Politically Correct speech and work sanctions?

Well, it creates fear. Fear of sanction. Fear of being seen as insensitive, fear of being considered racist and bigoted, fear of rejection by ones peers, fear of loss of job and income, fear of being passed over for grant money, if the wrong areas of scientific research are pursued, fear of others' opinions in the political arena. Ah, the threat of lawsuit, of losing one's livelihood, threat of having one's reputation stained, the threat of being bombed! - these are all operating in our lives today to some extent.

FEAR- FEAR - FEAR. Is it worth it? Who stands to gain from this fear-mongering, designed to produce apprehension and doubt? Well, the environmentalists for sure. Never mind that our planet has seen countless ice ages come and go, without any apparent help from humankind.
Who stands to gain if I am labeled a racist? Not the blacks who live next door, or indeed any of the average 'people of color' I work with. Al Sharpton? Most assuredly, racists of his ilk, J.J., or any black politician would automatically milk it, if they could get some recognition, some perceived moment of, "Aha! gotcha, you whitebread mofo." But I have no name recognition, therefore would be of no use to the Al Sharptons or the Jesse Jacksons.

Nevertheless, the threat of censure, willingness to punish a white man for hurting the black's feelings is very real. The blacks must be constantly reminded that they are the victim, so the racial profiling scam can flourish. Again, only more laws can protect him from the bigoted white man. And men such as Al Sharpton to make sure everyone is paying attention.

Any offense, taken individually, just doesn't add up to keeping the threats and the fear-mongering going. But taken together, these provide a nanny government with fuel to make laws and more laws, outlawing such offenses. It's simple. The government will protect us from ourselves. The government will pass laws protecting our environment from its inhabitants - laws protecting you from me, never mind there are already on the books a fairly complex set of laws governing the social interaction of its citizens. No, no - we need more laws (and lawyers), and a relentless bureaucracy to implement them. And the government has 'useful idiots' aplenty. Couldn't function without them. In a democratic country such as ours, there are just enough checks and balances to keep the wolves off balance. With constant vigilance, may it always be so.

In our universities, the students face a constant and pervasive threat of censure, of outright loss of freedom of speech - or worse. Their newspapers are under attack, their clubs, their right to protest is met with an iron hand. It's really outrageous, and it comes from people (usually) acting out of a well-intentioned credo, to protect and preserve liberalism and cultural relativism by whatever means available. And it's getting more pervasive, with the inclination of a great many colleges to continue creating 'sensitivity programs', and making them mandatory.

Does anybody in their right mind think that there will not be a price for these clumsy attempts at social engineering? The pendulum will swing back the other way. It's Nature's way.
Nature, be it human or otherwise, will always win out.