A criticism I received some time ago was that I should see life in shades of gray instead of black and white, that there are no absolutes. Someone who says "absolutely" that there are no absolutes, is contradicting him or herself just by that statement. I tried not to laugh, but looking back I should have just burst into gales of laughter in response. But I am kind and not usually a mocking person, so I pretty much just explained that I did not hold that view. Positively No Absolutes? That being said, I plead guilty to the charge of believing in absolutes. Truth being an anchor of those beliefs. I don't like liars. I don't like people who speak out of both sides of their mouths. I also don't like those who think they are advancing some great societal peace by taking two completely incompatible sides of an issue while thinking they are being "inclusive."
For instance, the idea that "democracy" automatically means " freedom" is ignoring Iran, Venezuela, and Cuba, etal. Freedom is not "democracy." A dictator, a totalitarian, a despot can presumably be elected by some "democratic" process. Americans would be fools to believe that including the Muslim Brotherhood into the "democracy" in Egypt is going to bring peace or freedom to that area of the world. Americans would also be fools to believe that the Clintons and Obama don't have their fingerprints all over the chaos in the middle east.
MY DEAR WORMWOOD,
"I note what you say about guiding our patient's reading and taking care that he sees a good deal of his materialist friend. But are you not being a trifle naïf? It sounds as if you supposed that argument was the way to keep him out of the Enemy's clutches. That might have been so if he had lived a few centuries earlier. At that time the humans still knew pretty well when a thing was proved and when it was not; and if it was proved they really believed it. They still connected thinking with doing and were prepared to alter their way of life as the result of a chain of reasoning. But what with the weekly press and other such weapons we have largely altered that. Your man has been accustomed, ever since he was a boy, to have a dozen incompatible philosophies dancing about together inside his head. He doesn't think of doctrines as primarily "true" of "false", but as "academic" or "practical", "outworn" or "contemporary", "conventional" or "ruthless". Jargon, not argument, is your best ally in keeping him from the Church."
The radical Destroyer in Chief is especially talented in duplicity, (ahem) by that I mean lies. For instance, telling Americans that under his plan they can keep their health insurance if they wish to. Sometimes you get a glimmer of truth out of him when he says, "under my policies, energy prices would necessarily skyrocket." But for the most part, he cloaks all of his public language in middle of the road dressings, all the while, behind the scenes, he is appointing Czars who are regulating people's lives out of existence. His childhood lessons in Communism from his family were not lost on him. The Marxist philosophy of the end justifying the means is his creed. So if you, American citizens, vote into office representatives who won't do Obama's bidding, he just goes around them and gives regulatory power to the executive branch...himself.
The Presidency is one example. What is especially disconcerting lately is the exact same duplicity in local governments. This has not happened by accident. If taking Federal money with strings means your local leaders are going to use your tax dollars for things other than your democratic preferences, well..your local leaders are pretty much telling you to stick it where the sun don't shine, so to speak. In the town I live in, our local leaders are using our tax dollars for everything else other than what our tax dollars are meant to cover. Then, running out of money, the local leaders come whining that they can't pay for normal services, so they must raise taxes or create extra fees so they don't break the budget. They already broke the budget by playing the progressive Federal game of "green" initiatives or building trinkets such as a community convention center, downtown renovations, a White Water Center, etc., all of which are projects that used to be funded with private capital. Now that federal policies have wrecked whole industries and removed capital from U.S. businesses through the "redistribution of wealth," politicians have turned to private citizens to pay for these trinkets. Who eventually ends up either paying up or going broke? The citizens who live here, or those who live in anytown, USA who are suffering through the same type of corrupt local leadership. Someone tell me, what good is a White Water Center, a greenway, or a Convention Center if the local government is broke and the national economy is crumbling? Further, if the public is against spending money on those things, what "democracy" are our leaders supporting?
Incompatible philosophies, and lies are leading us into chaos and conflict and economic ruin, not just on a national level, but locally. The end does not justify the means. Our national leaders are on a path of destruction. Our local leaders are marching right behind them with rings on their fingers and bells on their toes, spending our money on the rings and the bells. We do not need to follow them. The place to start recognizing the truth is here in your own backyard.
Hat tips to:
The Truth on FDR - Connections to Marxism