Slaying the Liberal Dragon

I know that I promised a full breakdown of "The New Deal", it's almost ready, but something has come up that I must share.

Over the weekend I sat with some friends and had a cigar while discussing the finer points of politics and religion. They say that those are topics that you aren't supposed to talk about in a group but that's asinine. Really, think about it, the only reason we ever bite our tongues is when we are trying to keep people from learning what we don't want them to know.

That is how the left, throughout time, has stifled freedom. They make it unsociable to talk about anything that they deem a threat. That's why they lean on laws that control free speech like the fairness doctrine. That is also why leftists like Marx, Hitler and FDR have all but abolished the freedom to express religion in public places. It was his era that ushered in the principles of "Social Democracy" or in other words, the freedom to express only the popular opinion. That term is still being used today as a founding principle by the new left.

I'm sure that I will elaborate on that topic later but lets deal with the topic at hand.

Within my group of friends there is one who personifies the liberal mindset. She is a genuinely caring and loving person with her heart in the right place, sort of, well... she's all heart. Her empathy clouds her judgement... or purifies it from her perspective.

We were talking about guns and the congressional attack on our freedoms. We spoke of the hurricane Katrina aftermath when the all powerful government collected the guns from all of those who had bought them legitimately and processed the proper paperwork that lead the government right to the homes listed on those registrations. This left good people defenceless during a heightened state of civil unrest while not accounting for the guns carried illegally by thugs and criminals.

She thought that was a brilliant idea, she said that it was the only way the government could get the majority of guns off the streets and that the police then could focus on just the criminals. We could not explain to her that.. A. It was unconstitutional... and B. It only opened the door for more crime.

People that fall into the trap of ignorance that is liberalism seem to believe that the police are there to protect and serve us as advertised on their cars. They cannot grasp that cops are a response mechanism, not a preventionist organization. While they can dissuade a certain amount of crime they aren't psychic and therefore cannot prevent it. Our founding fathers left it up to us to protect ourselves from others and gave us the justice system to clean up the mess afterwards. Law enforcement is simply there to make sure that we get our trial whether we want it or not.

Her response to our claim that disarming the honest public only emboldens the wicked was "I call Bull Sh--". This was a forty year old woman who was confident that her "BS" defence was rock solid and that the onus was on us to prove her wrong. Again, the mentality of the left, only the concepts of the right require proof.

So as good conservatives would do, we referred to the city of Kennesaw Georgia. In 1982 the city counsel of Kennesaw unanimously passed a law requiring all "heads of household" to own a firearm. In that year the crime rate dropped 89% and has stayed down since then (property crime is .0243% there, as opposed to other towns of equal size which average 20 times higher) . She noted that it was a small town and that we'd offered no proof that the same thing could happen in a big city. She was positive that the same law in a large population would lead to a giant leap in crime but had absolutely no evidence to back up her claim, the burden of proof would still rest on us.

We spoke of the "Wild west", a time when there was virtually no gun control at all and almost everyone carried a firearm. Back then several men would get drunk and start throwing punches, among other things, in a bar fight. Regardless of the scope of the beatings, those guys almost never drew their weapons. They knew that if they were wrong to draw then everyone else would draw on them. In Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell, for the years from 1870 to 1885, there were only 45 total homicides. This means that during the most violent 15 year span of that century (excluding war time) your chances of being killed by a bullet were 1 in 100,000. Below is a list of gun control meccas, with populations generally similar to the combined populations of those "wild west" cities, from one single year (2007).

DC – 183 Murders (31 per 100,000 residents)
New York – 494 Murders (6 per 100,000 residents)
Baltimore – 281 Murders (45 per 100,000 residents)
Newark – 104 Murders (37 per 100,000 residents)

She said that people were different back then and that we had still proven nothing. She offered that modern cities would explode in a hail of bullets if citizens were equally armed and that we'd need real proof that she was wrong, all the while, still resting the burden of proof on us.

She made it clear that it was in our best interest to allow the federal government to disarm Americans and that doing so through regulation was perfectly constitutional. We were insane to conceive that we may need to, one day, protect ourselves from the very government that she feels is so capable of protecting us from each other. Again, she replied with "I call Bull Sh--" to that premise. With 10,000 years of historical examples of that very thing happening on every single occasion, she could not accept that we were not exempt from that possibility.

Oddly, her willingness to circumvent the Constitution, when it came to guns and free speech, was stowed when regarding religion. She thought it absurd that we would lie about the congressional democrats trying to make it illegal for faith based medical establishments to turn away abortions. She swore that we were twisting the purpose of that movement because democrats believed in a total separation of church and state and that such a law would be unconstitutional. After all, it has always been the republicans that stood in the way of our freedoms.

Yes, the whole conversation shook me for hours. I'm still spinning from the pure irrationality of the entire dialogue. This group of liberals, the ignorant ones, are sure that republicans were the racist ones even though it was they who had fought to free the slaves. They insist that the public display of pornography is "freedom of speech" while forcing legislation that prevents anyone from voicing a Conservative opinion without backing it with the opposing viewpoint. They think that republicans start wars and that Democrats end them despite the fact that Americas involvement in WWI, WWII, The Korean War,The Vietnam War, Bosnia and Somalia were all initiated by Democratic Presidents.

We can educate most of them but some are beyond repair. It is true that "Liberalism is a mental disorder" for many but it is our responsibility to get out there and inform those who are merely liberal by default, due to ignorance. This means that YOU are required to talk about politics and religion to everyone you know, no matter how uncomfortable it seems, but you must also be able to recognize the signs and move on when you've encountered someone like my friend.

This is the primary purpose of the Tavernor meeting, to inform and prepare. We need to engage the left and fight common ignorance with historical fact. We need to spread the the hope of freedom through the virtue of personal responsibility. We must teach these angry, bitter, fire breathing dragons that "freedom" does not mean that we guarantee freedom from pain, sickness, failure, loss, hard work or responsibility. They must understand that we only guarantee the RIGHT TO LIFE where no one can take it from you, nor can they take the fruits of your time if not offered. The right to LIBERTY, thus allowing you to make and act on any decision, no matter how self detrimental, as long as you are not impeding the rights of others. The PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS, with no implications that others are required to help or hurt your chances of actually reaching that goal. Those are the only RIGHTS that our creator has endowed us with and the only true definition of freedom.

Friends, I wish you luck in your quest to slay the liberal dragons and if you find it hard to do alone then you are welcome to guide them toward me. I'd be more than happy to carry on a friendly, civil debate with your socialist comrade.