Diary

Liberals and Choice

In the continuing saga of liberal hypocrisy, this diary entry deals with their weird conception of choice.  It seems odd that a group of people who hold themselves out to be the champions of choice are the very same people who wish to deny others choice in so many areas of American life.  Their’s is a strange concept predicated upon the underlying belief that their solutions are correct to the exclusion of competing ideas and that they speak from a pulpit of expertise and righteousness.  But in so many areas, they actually deny choice to Americans that run the gamut from the absurd to the very real and scary and, ultimately, deadly.

There are several examples that can be cited in this area.  I have written extensively that one area where liberals oppose choice is in schooling.  To them, the only choice is public schools and a never-ending series of increased funding when realistically looking at this solution and ts application has produced negligible or no results.  Beholden to teacher unions and their demand for more money, they actually deny educational choice to the most vulnerable of students- minorities and the poor.  In effect, they keep private schooling options the sole province of the rich who can afford private schools.  This is probably why many of these white-guilt liberals send their children to private schools- they simply do not want their kids mingling with “those kids.”  It is not only hypocritical, but its also bigoted.

In the theater of the absurd, some cities like New York recently attempted to actually limit of soft drink sizes disguised as an attempt to reign in obesity as if the 7-11 Big Gulp was the sole culprit.  One supposes that given the chance, they would also limit the sale of junk food and potato chips which seems odd considering these items can be bought with food stamps.  Likewise, smoking bans (although I agree with them and adhere to them) are also a denial of choice.  If they allowed the free market to dictate banning smoking, that would be another thing since many establishments were headed that way regardless without the heavy hand of government.  Another absurd example is ethanol mandates in gasoline which only serve farmers of corn.  It is well-documented that ethanol blended in gasoline damages car engines, requires additives to keep down pollution and does nothing to increase gas mileage.  If the environmental do-gooders want ethanol in their gas for whatever reason, give them that choice.  But do not deny a choice to the remainder of drivers.

The curriculum in schools is not a matter of choice, especially now under Common Core.  Although sold as a “the teacher has many options to choose from” program, because the tests ignore that alleged choice, there is no choice in the practical sense.  Hence, in science students are taught the politically correct belief that global warming is a done deal and the planet will explode if we humans do not do something.  They are now taught that America is basically a racist, misogynistic, imperialist destroyer of the planet.  And God forbid someone suggests that abstinence- the only sure 100% method of birth control- be included in health education.  While we on the Right (or most of us) know that abstinence-only education does not work (boys will be boys and girls will be girls and those hormones will rage), does simply ignoring it- as liberals want- create any problems?

Lately, the liberals have been touting the labeling of genetically-modified foods as if they are some evil creation of mad scientists at Dow and DuPont.  Selective breeding, cross-breeding and genetically modified foods have been created since the time of Gregor Mendel.

More ominously, the liberals want to control what we hear and how we think by suggesting nice-sounding things “The Fairness Doctrine.”  There is a reason people listen to conservative talk radio and generally turn off liberal talk radio: its more appealing, more open to dissenting views, and a Rush Limbaugh is, quite frankly, more interesting than Rachel Maddow.  Further, relying on a 200-year-old letter from Thomas Jefferson that has nothing to do with the actual First Amendment, they are attempting to silence religious speech and freedom in the name of “fairness” and “civil rights.”  Everyone is for fairness and civil rights except conservatives are also in favor of fairness and the civil rights of religions and religious people.

And someone needs to explain to me how unionization in any way increases employee choice.  If anything, the employee is bound in a form of slavery to the union and slavery and choice are opposites of one another.  But, they explain, it is for the collective good of the worker.  In reality, its for the collective good of the union’s coffers.  Things have gotten so bad that even speech is now denied choice and has descended into a series of alleged code words or “dog whistles” that must be avoided lest you be labeled a bigot or worse.

In fact, liberal choice is selective and the “choice” offered is what is deemed politically correct.  Nothing could be further from the truth and Americans know it deep in their hearts which is why the Left often resorts to name-calling and derogatory statements about anyone or anything that dare speaks out against their conception of “choice.”  To the Left, there is no choice to gun ownership, how much and how your tax money is spent, what you learn in school, what radio stations you listen to, what type of gasoline you put in your car, where you smoke a cigarette, who represents your best interests on the job or the size of your soft drinks.

There is but one area where the Left has been the most consistent when it comes to choice and that is with abortion.  One may say also another possible area is gender identity which still confuses me more than the sufferer of “gender identity” problems.  The solution seems rather simple- look between your legs; that is usually a good indicator of your gender (and not to seem crass, but I have a degree in psychology).  So, the woman should have a free choice to abort an innocent human life and should have the choice to determine whether Dan is really a Danielle, but in all other areas there is only one choice- the one they prescribe.  Nowhere is my disgust with the Left greater than with their hypocritical conceptualization of “choice.”