View Mobile Site
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

 

'Do as I say, not as I do'

Posted: April 22, 2008 5:13 p.m.
Updated: June 23, 2008 5:01 a.m.
 
Recently two local Republicans announced they would be writing commentaries for The Signal in addition to Monday's "Right Her Right Now." These two men, Steve Lunetta and Paul Strickland, have different styles but both write excellent commentaries. The news of their more frequent submissions is gratifying on a couple of fronts. One, The Signal is pretty much dominated by the left six days out of seven (nationally and locally) and two, Messrs. Lunetta and Strickland set forth clear, supported information. Alas, the announcement was not good news for all.

In short order, a liberal commentary attacked the disclosure. "How dare Republicans write yet another day in The Signal" was the message. The seething anger in that commentary dripped off of the pages. This scenario once again illustrates the hypocrisy of the left. There is more.

Liberals profess to be all about freedom and equality.

Apparently that's only true if another's freedoms do not disagree with them, and perhaps some are just more equal than others. What about Mr. Lunetta's and Mr. Strickland's freedom of speech? It shouldn't matter if they want to write four days a week.

How about that freedom for "the right to choose"?

Apparently, it only applies to abortion.

Liberals deny the freedom of choice for parents who want charter schools for their children. In California, liberals are trying to abolish home schooling. They have taken away parents' rights not to have their second-graders be taught how to put condoms on bananas - all in the name of sex education.

They have taken away a parent's right to be informed of a 12-year-old child's abortion - let alone the parent's right to take part in the decision. The rest of us better not even think of praying in school; however, art or language that translates to pornography is absolutely acceptable ... to liberals.

While you're at it, there better not be any mention within earshot of liberals of Christmas vacation or Easter break.

Liberals salivate at taking away the choice of the right to bear arms. Let's set forth mandates and restrictions on lawfully owning a gun, but go easy on the creep who uses one to harm others.

Many liberal politicians are vocal about taking away our choice of medical coverage by mandating medical care for you and me while they sit pretty with superior health coverage - coverage they do not pay for.

Taxpayers do. Be mindful of the fact that if some, like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, have their way, the rest of us will not only pay for our own health care but we will also pay for those who will not pay their own way, as well as for illegal aliens.

Their "plan" does not specify legitimacy or citizenship. On second thought, we do that now. ...

It's simply that for those of us who take responsibility for our own health care and coverage, irrespective of the horrendous costs, will then be told by the government what and how much we can purchase.

Liberals would choose to tell the rest of us which cars to drive while they commandeer their gas hogs or are chauffeured in a limo. Now they are trying to convince us to let them manually regulate the amount of electricity that we use in our specific homes on a given day. I'm all for (and practice) living conservatively and not wasting any kind of resource; however, liberals tell others how to live their lives and how to minimize carbon footprints while they live in huge opulent homes (often owning several at a time) with acres of manicured grounds that leave footprints of utility resources and pesticides the average guy can't even imagine. The names of Al Gore (in his Tennessee mansion and private jet travels), John Edwards (ditto) and the Hollywood elites (ditto again) come to mind.

Some conservatives have been "dis-invited" to speak at colleges (including Laura Bush at UCLA) and other events because liberals didn't like it. Many other conservative speakers have been shouted down, threatened and physically attacked off of the dais (David Horowitz, Ann Coulter, Karl Rove, to name but a few).

In other words, there is no tolerance (the same "tolerance" that liberals profess to be all about) for anyone who dares have or express an opinion different from theirs. Again, so much for that pesky freedom of speech thing.

When criminals commit egregious acts such as brutal murder(s), remorseless child molestations and merciless rapes, liberals expect the public to feel pity. Not for the victims but for the criminal. We are supposed to consider the felons' life background, their fabricated mental states and look to rehabilitation and lenient sentencing so they can receive "counseling" to be free to return to society to commit more crimes.

It is indeed ironic that the "youthful" 20-year-old flagrant convict should be granted leniency because of his immature psyche but a 12-year-old is astonishingly mature enough, on her own, to make the life-changing decision to have an abortion.

Taxes? Liberals rail against "the Bush tax cuts." They fail to mention that Bill Clinton, with Al Gore casting Congress's tie-breaking vote, pushed through very large tax increases, and made them retroactive, on working Americans of all income levels. It seems likely that the touted "tax cuts" are a reinstatement of pre-Clinton increases.

I have read more than once from liberals how the taxpayers "starve" their government by not paying enough in taxes. The hypocrisy is that not one of these faux complainers pays one extra cent in taxes when they clearly have the option to do so at any time. The vilifiers absolutely take advantage of every "Bush tax cut" available to them.

Wealth is to be "redistributed." Not that of the liberals, but yours. They plan on keeping their riches through every loophole possible such as "off-shore accounts" etc.; all of the frills not procurable for the average Joe. To wit, the millions Ted Kennedy and his family have avoided paying in taxes with their schemes, along with John Edwards who avoided paying $600,000 in social security and Medi-Care taxes by taking millions from his law firm in the form of dividends versus a salary. Yes, John, we can agree; there are indeed two Americas (the theme of his failed run for the presidency).

Billionaire Warren Buffet heartily spouts the rest of us fail to pay enough in taxes. Apparently "volunteering" is not in his vocabulary, either.

Moreover, he is very in favor of government control over our earnings, yet when it came to donating $32 billion, he gave it to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation because he knew the group would be better financial stewards than the government. Hypocrite.

Terrorism? Liberals tell us we just need to "talk" to the rest of the world, irrespective of their histories and centuries of barbarism and warring.

These are the same people who build large walls around their properties and hire bodyguards, often armed. Why do that if you can "talk" to anybody and everybody?

Hollywood celebrities are the prime example of this hypocrisy.

Barack Obama says he will talk to every country's leader regardless of his or her penchant for terrorism, yet he was the first presidential candidate to use extra Secret Service protection. Why didn't he just talk to anyone who may want to do him harm, like the USA is told to do on our behalf? A few years ago on her now-failed talk show, Rosie O'Donnell attacked Tom Selleck on his NRA stance. It was disclosed the next day (and admitted to by her) that she employs bodyguards for her children, and those bodyguards carry guns.

This is only a smattering of the sanctimony, pietism and dishonesty of liberals. You get the point. In their world it is do as I say, not as I do.

Comments

Commenting not available.
Commenting is not available.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...