The “Liberal” media once again showed their true colors, and these are not the American colors despite the fact that many of them are waving red, blue, and white in a wake of the losses the “Liberals” incurred in the 2010 mid-term elections.

Take, for instance, Tucson, Ariz., shooting that left a U.S. congresswoman critically wounded, and 19 others injured or dead earlier this month.

Although all facts known at this moment indicate that the killer was a lone, mentally ill psychopath whose political orientation, that has been described so far either as unknown or Left, doesn’t seem to have played a role as the motive of his crime, the “Liberal” media were quick to make him look as a right-wing extremist and blamed Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, as well as the “vitriol” that the opponents of neo-socialistic push by President Obama and Democratic lawmakers poured into the supposedly civil political discourse.

We know that for over a decade now, virtually all terrorists that carried their attacks on American soil were either Muslim or had ties to Islam. Many of them were invoking their Muslim religion while preparing or committing their acts of terror. Yet the “Liberal”-controlled media have imposed de facto a gag order on discussing in public the strong statistical correlation between the religious orientation of a perpetrator and his readiness to kill the innocent for the “cause”, and labeled about everybody who dared to notice that correlation as “racist”, “xenophobe”, and “anti-Muslim” bigot.

As this weren’t enough of nonsense, the media haven’t stopped here. Now, when a lunatic kills innocent people, not only do the “Liberal” media blame what they referred to as “far right” (those who disobey the new order that they have been trying to impose on America) for the killing, but also, as soon as some commentators indicate that there is no fact that would justify such a conclusion, they deceitfully insinuate that the “far right” could only admit a terrorist motivation of a shooter if the shooter were Muslim.

In other words, they are using the facts (the said correlation), mischaracterized as propaganda and/or hate speech, in order to make their hostile propaganda look like the facts and to intimidate their critics who see through the scam. So, it’s not that they just got it wrong, they literally put it upside down.

This general pattern may be characterized as follows.

The “Liberals” assert false dogmas, like that all people are equal (as opposed to “are created equal”, which at the time the Declaration of Independence was written was a way of saying that there was no such thing as a nobility by birth, and no power, domestic or foreign, could be imposed on a nation based on such), which in the most absurd form is expressed by the hard-core “Liberal” propagandists as “the race is a purely social construct” (a convenient fiction that allows them to import Marx’s class warfare rhetoric into the realm of American political debate), or that diversity and multiculturalism are strengths. And then they derive all the nonsense that follows from these absurdities. As soon as the reality contradicts their false dogmas and the nonsense that follows, an eventuality which should surprise no one, they literally turn the truth upside down, painting the facts as evil (“right-wing”, “racist”, and “conservative” are examples of the epithets typically invoked in such a context) propaganda in order to make their hostile anti-American propaganda look like the reality.

Many Americans are hopeful that the majority of the “Liberals” are well-meaning folks who just need to have their eyes opened so that they can be reconciled with the truth. Unfortunately, this doesn’t seem like a realistic plan.

As soon as the “Liberals” have developed quasi-religious belief in their false dogmas, they become inherently hostile to all facts that contradict these dogmas, and to those who state these facts. This hostility to truth appears to be their main motivation in their quest to deprive their critics of free speech rights, even though the “Liberals” portray themselves as uncompromising defenders of First Amendment.

But dismissal of inconvenient truth about unequal ability of individuals to succeed in a free society, as well as about heredity thereof, as well as suppressing free speech on the related issues, are not enough to actually make the reality obey the said dogmas. So, the “Liberals” resort to their second weapon of choice: forcing a change of reality.

In a few words, the main objective of the said forcing is to make the “Liberal” false dogmas true, or, at least, to make them look as if they were true.

Individuals are not preforming equally good in schools and universities, and are not equally successful in their careers? Impose restrictions and rules (for instance, affirmative action, racial and ethnic-based preferences and quotas, and other measures to force closure of “academic performance gap”) that eliminate the differences or any manifestations thereof. Individuals do not enjoy the same wealth an living standards? Impose redistribution of income and wealth (mostly by “progressive” taxation, but also by “socially just” lending practices, particularly for large ticket items, like homes and cars) that eradicate “economic inequalities”. The economy crippled by the above measures shows signs of downturn and decay? Impose governmental control of private companies that would replace healthy competition and free market with subsidies, bailouts, punitive taxation, and other “regulation”. (Elimination of competition between groups, enterprises, and individuals seems like the topmost objective on the “Liberal” ToDo list.)

Now, all those who refuse to be ripped off the fruits of their work and to pay for the “Liberal” agenda of “progressive”change, never mind giving up freedom to enjoy the benefits of capitalist abundance, are declared public enemies. And as soon as the “Liberals” maneuver themselves into positions of power they go after the “refuseniks”, resorting to outright hostilities towards the uncooperative subjects.

The “Liberal” ideology is not intended to pursue truth and liberty but to defend and implement its false egalitarian dogmas. This is why so many “Liberals” are so hostile to normal Americans. As long as they (the “Liberals”) retain control (most of) the media, (most of) the education system, and (most of) the government, our dream Constitutional Republic is in a grave danger of being turned into a neo-socialist nightmare, with all the misery (e.g., overpopulation, poverty, and a lack of liberty) that socialism has been notorious for.

They are not going to let the current crisis go to waste, easily, so be ready to resit the next blow that they are likely to deliver to our nation, soon.

January 11, 2011

~ The Author ~
Mr. Dwyer has been a continuing contributor to the Federal Observer. Mark Andrew Dwyer’s commentaries (updated frequently) can be found here. Send your comments to readerswrite@yahoo.com.