Bury the Word “Liberal”
Last night I had the unpleasant experience of listening to leftwing bigot Mike Malloy rant on about Ginnie and Clarence Thomas. Malloy was apoplectic. “That damn filthy Nazi” is the way he referred to Thomas whom he portrayed as “house Negro” and basically a moron who couldn’t speak or write his own opinions. This gutter mouth racist, however, is referred to as a liberal talk show host in the current perverse political vocabulary of our current age. It’s time to bury the word liberal when it’s so casually applied to racists and bigots and communist progressives (the word “progressive” is just Orwellian doublespeak as well). Nor should “liberal” be applied to the legions of Democrats and “moderate” leftists who embrace, protect and make possible brainless scum like Malloy.
These are the kind of people who want to control the ideology of the minorities, who they seem to think they own. Dissenting thought by people like Clarence Thomas is not to be tolerated. It must be isolated and destroyed, or as I like to call it, being "rule #12'd".
I totally agree ! we need to call them for what they are communists.
Clarence Thomas is more intelligent and has more class than all the leftists put together. Everyone should read his autobiography, "My Grandfather's Son."
Mike Malloy – although I have never seen or heard of him before – appears from this article and the comments appended to be a person I would not want around my grandchildren, or certainly in my home. He certainly appears to have a quite poison personality and the photo of him shows someone who is quite troubled.
I wonder who pulled his chain at some past date? I wonder what his personal demons are, that he calls out a supreme court justice like that. This Malloy is the equivalent of a rabid dog, foaming at the mouth, loose in the street.
I agree those who are nowadays called liberals actually operate in the world of limitations. Whether it's the idea minorities cannot succeed without them or the belief our planet cannot provide for the very life that began on it.
I agree those who are nowadays called liberals actually operate in the world of limitations. Whether it's the idea minorities cannot succeed without them or the belief our planet cannot provide for the very life that began on it.
Another great example of someone who's an intellectual giant, who lives among the progressive pygmies, is Thomas Sowell. They don't stand a chance against someone who is 'armed and dangerous' against the progressive cause. That's why he is demonized and hated among the
intellectual statists and elitists, who are in essence a bunch of empty suits.
The Lefts reaction to Thomas is similar in vein to that of Palin, both are deemed social "apostates" by self appointed purveyors of Leftist approved popular culture, simply because they freely express their American "individualism" in spite of their apostasy.
Leftist hate it when women and blacks run from THEIR plantation.I know from personal experience as a woman.
Oh let's just face the facts on why Mike Malloy (I really have no idea who he is) is having a stroke over the involvement of Ginnie in the tea party movement and the brillance of Judge Thomas. Ginnie is a white woman that dared to become educated and then marry a black man. And the most critical point of all is that Judge Thomas is an independent thinker and brillant jurist instead of being an uneducated, dependent inner-city/getto black that is dependent on the good will of the democratic party that just shuffles along to the tunes of the DNC piper.
I'm writing a glossary for myself, since I make up a lot of words. You have to, when the words you need don't exist. Liberal is an existing word, but I felt it needed defining. This is what I came up with:
Liberalism: Politically, the doctrine that governments are a necessary evil—since for now at least the self restraint facilitated by various types of virtue is insufficient to the task of protecting the weakest among us—but that authority should be spread as broadly as possible, and always kept within a context of structural blocks to the unlimited consolidation of power.
The American Constitution is the most perfect liberal document ever created. We all know that the three branches of the Federal Government check one another (in theory: practically, there exists no legislative remedy, currently, to the usurpation of authority by the Supreme Court), but there are many other structural balances. The authority of the Federal Government was intended to be checked by the sovereign States, as codifed in the 10th Amendment. The authority of our elected representatives—who can do what they want once they are elected—is checked by regular votes. The potential usurpation of authority by a centralized military is checked by the guarantee of gun ownership, and the existence of State militias. The underlying idea is that unlimited power, once granted, and even if benign at first, will sooner or later become malignant.
Philosophically, Liberalism is the idea that since none of us can be presumed to possess absolute truth, that all of us be free to believe and say what we want, provided we injure no one else in so doing, and that the role of government is to protect those rights. Constitutionally, the right to regulate areas of moral ambiguity were intended to rest with the States. This would include abortion, drug regulation, euthanasia, prostitution, and the provision of social services.
I do not think that the policies of Scandinavian countries are intrinsically bad, but in the United States I think the sundry States should make their own policies, and States like California that screw it up should suffer the consequences.
Clarence Thomas is the product of someone who is self-reliant and holds the 'individual' above
the progressive 'group-think' mentality. He's an independent thinker who upholds and protects
the Constitution as our founding fathers would want. Progressives hate those, who especially
are black, and can, by reason and rational thought, annihilate the meaningless flatulations of
their 'government dependent' ideology.
I'd have to say that the Thomas confirmation hearings were more like the Salem witch trials in that Clarnence Thomas had to prove he was not a sexual harrasser (I guess that's kind of like a witch) against the unsubstantiated claims of his accuser (also kind of like a witch). Well, I thought we did away with that kind of thing a long time ago. Are we starting it up again? (If we are, then Pelosi's a ….)
Malloy is immoral and EVIL as is his ideology, communism.
Agree! Time to discontinue giving the COMMUNISTS a pass with politically correct labels like Progressives, Liberals, Far Left.! God needs to be restored to His RIGHTFUL PLACE in America!!!!! as written by our Founding Fathers; most TRUE AMERICANS KNOW, our Judeo-Christian Heritage is as much a part of America's History as the Constitution itself! American public education system also needs a TOTAL OVERHAUL and GENUINE AMERICAN HISTORY + THE CONSTITUTION, and consequences of COMMUNISM (all flavors) exposed for the FAILURE they inevitably bring to a nation it permeates and poisons! The entitlement mentality is the real world for such a large portion of the American population, maybe it's time to re-write the voting eligibility laws where only those who pay taxes are allowed to vote! The welfare state will always vote themselves whatever entitlement the government offers. We are close to a tipping point where the Nanny state supporters outnumber those who work for what they have and are self accountable, teaching their children the same!
He looks evil.
i know who clarence thomas is, and consider him a wise man, worthy of respect. who is this "mike malone" person, and why should i consider his opinion worth my time and. attention
I'm not impressed with Clarence Thomas, and i also think that when you show dissent toward our goverment, it dosen't mean your unpatriot, let me quote a former rebuplican president of the united states (Men and women who dare's to dissent from accepted doctrine of their heir's, may we never confuse hoest dissent from disloyal subversions)…….by….Dwight..D.. Eisenhower….
Keith, I'm not impressed by your ability to write an English sentence or form a cogent argument. Are you a recent product of Democrat-controlled public education?
Keith – you are totally missing the point.
Or do you mean to say that president Eisenhower would label calling someone you aren't impressed with a "damn filthy Nazi" as "honest dissent"?
Thank you, David! Whenever politics comes up in conversation and someone calls me a conservative, I always correct them and say, "No, I'm a liberal." Then I explain what the original meaning of the word liberal was (and still is in Europe) and that people who call themselves "liberals" today would more accurately be described as "socialists" or "statists." Although, classical liberals often describe themselves as "libertarian," I prefer the sound of "liberal," and I don't see any reason to use a term that was invented solely because a group of radicals decided to misappropriate a word that already had a clear and widely understood meaning. I don't mind the word "progressive" so much because while it's disingenuous, it's not as blatantly dishonest as using a term derived from the word "liberty" to describe people who's political positions are defined by their opposition to allowing citizens the freedom to make their own decisions. Although, I don't expect other conservatives to start calling themselves "liberals," I wish they'd stop using it to describe their opponents on the left, and start calling what they are.
The term that most accurately describes the American Left is "Statist".