The typical Progressive Liberal confuses me, and quite frankly, I think they are confused as well. What they say and do are so contradictory to a rational line of thinking leaves me with multiple WTH moments.
This is the second installment of the series.
The more and more that I think about what a Progressive Liberal states and what they do is leading me to a thought that the Progressive Liberal is anti-person to the point that they will sacrifice people to achieve what they believe will be the ultimate Utopia on earth. Let’s take the following examples.
During a speech on gun control, the most rabidly Progressive Liberal President that the United States has ever had stated, “If there’s a step we can take to save even one child, we should take that step.” This same President praised the abortion provider Planned Parenthood. One can smell the hypocrisy…
When the government of California was taken over by the Ecology wing of the Progressive Liberals, most if not all forward-thinking water management plans (reservoirs & dams) were cancelled stating ecological damage to certain critters. As the population grew, the water infrastructure became less and less capable of supporting the populace and the farming industry. California is now suffering a water shortage of epic proportions due to these shortcomings. The Progressive Liberal solution is to cut back water consumption to both the population and to the farmers, especially the farmers. What happens to the California economy if the farmers go broke, and the people if they starve?
The Progressive Liberal is, for the most part, rabidly anti-gun (there are a few exceptions). No price is too great to pay to rid guns from the population. If they have their way, no one but the government and criminals will have guns, and the law-abiding population will have no defense against the predators from either group.
“With guns, we are citizens. Without guns, we are subjects.” – Anonymous
The Progressive Liberal always seem to promote and encourage other viewpoints, but when confronted with other opinions and facts, the reaction is almost always the same: Deny and attack the confronter personally. It’s almost comical if they weren’t so damned serious and seemingly unaware of their hypocrisy.
The Progressive Liberal also is promoting electric cars as an alternative to gasoline powered cars because they are more environmentally friendly. Not so. Energy must be created to charge the batteries, so the power is being generated for the vehicle is being moved from the tailpipe of the vehicle to the power plant. The chemicals used in the batteries are very toxic, and cannot be fully recycled (let’s not go into the mining of the components, which is a toxic process in of itself). The cars are relatively expensive, which lower income people simply cannot afford. And finally, it is not very practical for people with large commutes to have a car that runs out of energy after 30-40 miles (think California multilane highways clogged with cars).
But the Progressive Liberal has answers for the above. Solar and wind electric generation replacing coal-fired power plants. More research (government funded, of course) to non-toxic alternatives to the battery and range situations. Cars will become cheaper as time goes on (with government subsidies to the poor).
Alternative energy such as solar and wind are not reliable, and have their own problems. Both take up huge amounts of land, and have their own negative impacts upon the environment, of which the Environmental wing of the Progressive Liberal is remarkably silent.
Government funding and subsidies come from the taxpayers, and quite frankly, I’m tired of paying taxes for boondoggles and the politically connected companies like Solyndra. It’s also somewhat comical when various Progressive Liberals find out that THEY will be paying for these programs out of their paycheck.
All of the above have had or are having negative impacts upon people of this country. Yet the Progressive Liberal is blissfully unaware of the hypocritical nature of their policies negative impacts, especially upon the people that they state that they to want to protect – the poor and disadvantaged.
More in Part 3 of “Unicorns and Rainbows.”