Seven Hard Truths Liberals Just Don’t Want To Hear ---- By Kurt Schlichter | Mar 31, 2014

It’s difficult to understand liberals when you don’t live in their 

sheltered cocoon of participation trophies,faux caring and feel-

good lies.

Those of us who labor in the real world – who built this

 country, who make it work and who defend it – deal with 

reality. Most liberals don’t. And that can be baffling, because

 when they speak they sound like visitors from the planet 

Nimrod.

Now, some liberals do understand the real world. They are the

 cynical liberal icons, the ones who know their entire ideology is

 a scam designed to wring power and wealth from the gullible.

They are the rich ones who cry about poverty and racism then

gleefully consign poor and minority kids to public school failure

factories by doing the bidding of their unionized teacher 

partners and torpedoing educational choice. Their own kids 

wouldn’t get within a mile of an inner city public school, except 

maybe to swing by in the Mercedes C-Class they got for their 

16th birthday to buy some weed from the gangbangers infesting

 it.

These liberals are the ones who demand we double energy

 prices and trade in our cars for seats on scuzzy busses driven

 by union drones because of global warming. The fact that it 

never actually gets any warmer won’t stop a liberal from 

hopping into his private jet and flying off to ink a deal to sell 

his network to some Mideast oil sheik for a zillion petro dollars.

Hard Truth Number 1:

 If you are a liberal who really believes that your liberal heroes

 actually believe in liberalism, you are a sucker and a fool.

 Maybe even foolish enough to let your daughter take a drive 

with one across a bridge.

Hard Truth Number 2 

concerns the minimum wage and the delusion that labor should 

be valued not between those who provide it and those who pay 

for it, but by you based upon your own subjective notion of 

“fairness.” The hard truth is that you are worth precisely what 

an employer will pay for you, and nothing more.

Take it from someone who employs a bunch of people – if I have

 to pay more for you at the unskilled bottom of the ladder, 

assuming I don’t cut low-end positions, that money is coming 

out of everyone else’s raises. Yeah, you warm, wonderful,

caring, and compassionate paternalists supporting raising the 

minimum wage are going to pay for it, because I’m sure as hell 

not.

Unlike many of you liberals, I started out flipping burgers at 

the Foster City Carls, Jr., for $3.10 an hour. I didn’t have one 

of those fake internships or create one of those bogus charities 

high school kids today manufacture to impress the admissions 

flunkies at overpriced, underworthy colleges. I worked. I hated

 it, but I learned valuable skills. These skills made it so that

 today I don’t have to bag fries, mop out toilets or toil as 

Michael Moore’s muffin wrangler.

Here’s Hard Truth Number 3:

 If you need government to set you a “living wage,” it’s because

 you have failed to make yourself worth a living wage. A higher

 minimum wage is merely a subsidy to ensure you don’t have to

put in the effort necessary to earn what you want. I’m unclear 

why your failure to work hard, gain skills and not do the stupid 

things that lead a 30 year old to be making minimum wage 

morally compels me to give you my money.

Next is Hard Truth Number 4:

 You shouldn’t have kids if you can’t afford them. A corollary to

this self-evident concept is that you shouldn’t have sex unless

 you can pay for your own birth control. Those of us who don’t

choose to live lives of chaos should not have to be taxed money 

from our kids so the government can give it to your kids 

because you are too lazy, stupid and/or drug-addled to support

 them yourself.

That brings us to Hard Truth Number 5:

 Liberalism depends on a huge number of Americans being

 losers who can’t support themselves. Broken or nonexistent 

families are the root of most of society’s pathologies, and they 

are also essential to the Democrat demographic model. The 

party’s very existence depends on there being a pool of serfs 

desperate for handouts distributed by Democrat overlords. If 

90% of Americans were self-sufficient and refused to trade 

their dignity for a few scraps in the form of various welfare 

payouts, there would be no modern Democrat Party.

In other words, your party must keep you poor, ignorant and 

helpless to survive. The Democrat mascot shouldn't be the 

donkey; it should be the tick.

Here’s Hard Truth Number 6:

 Your biggest problem is you. Now, a lot of people resent this

truth – they say it’s “blaming the victim.” But most of the time,

the purported “victim” is to blame. Did you drop out of school?

 Choose to use drugs? Have a couple kids with a couple losers? 

See, if so, you aren't a victim of circumstance. A victim of 

circumstance is someone struck by lightning or attacked by a 

gang of thugs in a Democrat-run city. You’re a recipient of consequences.

It’s not a tragedy when bad things happen to people who make

 bad choices. It’s a tragedy when we lie to them by validating 

their failures and then try to ameliorate those consequences by

 taking money from people who did all the right things.

And that leads to Hard Truth Number 7:

 This can’t go on.

Lady Thatcher famously formulated that, “The problem with

 socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's

 money.” And you will. The most amusing argument for raising

 the minimum wage is that all this new money paid to people

who aren’t worth it will get spent and gin up the economy. But

 the problem with this private sector stimulus idea is a

 foundational one: Where does the money come from to pay all

 these higher wages? From the magic dollar tree behind Mr. 

Pennybags’s mansion?

Liberalism is magical thinking promulgated by cynical 

exploiters upon the eternally gullible and the chronically 

lazy. It’s a political Ponzi scheme, and today’s participants 

are the unlucky marks coming in at the end of the grift.

Liberalism will collapse of its own dead weight. And when it 

does, you true believers better be ready for the hard truth 

that there is no such thing as a free lunch.

Author:

Kurt Schlichter

(Twitter: @KurtSchlichter) was 

personally recruited to write conservative 

commentary by Andrew Breitbart. He is a 

successful Los Angeles trial lawyer, a veteran 

with a masters in Strategic Studies from the 

United States Army War College, and a former 

stand-up comic.

The Collectivist Mind Game, Part 1: Demonizing the Non-Compliant

The Collectivist Mind Game, Part 1: Demonizing the Non-Compliant

 

By Oleg Atbashian

FROM The American Thinker January 22, 2013 

 

In the libertarian sci-fi classic, "The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress," Robert A. Heinlein describes a successful revolution of the individualistic, free-market-oriented residents of the Moon against the Earth's tyrannical big government. The ins and outs of agitating and organizing the masses to fight the oppressive Authority feel just as realistic as the finer points of everyday life in the underground Lunar cities of the future.

 

 

The proposed revolutionary scenario could even serve as a workable model for similar real-life endeavors, if only the renowned futurist author hadn't neglected to factor in the immanent function of any oppressive regime: systemic brainwashing of its subjects through the media, education, and entertainment channels.

 

 

If the tyrants on Earth were worth their salt, all the freedom-loving colonists would be subjected to an intense, manipulative indoctrination, which would shape their self-image as small and sinful "little guys" vis-à-vis the powerful, virtuous government that serves the powerless and protects them against all enemies, including themselves.

 

 

Thus, the government's propagandistic narrative would establish the illusion of a society divided into three major classes: the ruling government class, endowed with benevolent powers to guide or punish; the majority class of hapless losers, whose survival depended on the government's largesse and protection; and an unquantifiable class of demonized mysterious enemies of the government and, by extension, of the people, who would be the perceived culprits of all failures, hardships, and misery of the little guys' everyday existence.

 

 

The majority class would itself be divided into an assortment of narrow-interest groups, held together only by the glue of government's redistributive, pacifying and equalizing powers, as well as by their shared hostility towards the designated "enemies."

 

 

The prevailing feelings in such a society would be the collectivist fervor, envy of individual achievers, fear of chaos in the absence of the government's protection, hatred of anti-government elements, and hope for a better future once all the hidden enemies are unveiled and eliminated.

 

This makes Heinlein's scenario of a free-market revolution highly unlikely. No self-respecting oppressive regime would start a crackdown on the rebels without priming the population with a mass-media campaign that would show how big government benefits most of the people, and how the resistance is destroying the lives of the common folk. As a minimum, the government would parade a poor little girl crying on camera because she and her family suffered from the hands of the rebels. Even those who didn't hate the rebels before would hate them now.

 

In a society shaped by the government's mind games of manipulative illusions, a dissenter sticks out like a sore thumb. Once the resistance has been demonized, its members will be quickly identified and denounced by the compliant citizenry, labeled as the enemy, and be dealt with by law enforcement.

 

In the end, the self-preservation of modern-day totalitarianism is ensured, not so much by the secret police with its army of snitches and brutal enforcers, as by modern technologies of psychological manipulation through the media, education, and entertainment.

 

Perhaps, Heinlein's tyrannical regime came off so hapless because the author had had no experience of living in a totalitarian statist system. Writing The Moon in the early 1960s, he likely modeled the actions of the Lunar Authority on the methods used by the U.S. government against the Communists. And, as we now know, the U.S. government failed that mission, just like the Lunar Authority did in Heinlein's novel.

 

The FBI mostly relied on surveillance, infiltration, and recruiting of informants. Occasional amateur propaganda designed to immunize Americans against the seductive statist rhetoric turned out to be a flash in the pan. It was child's play compared to the vast arsenal deployed by the KGB and its affiliates in Communist countries.

 

The United States at the time didn't have an all-encompassing, totalitarian propaganda machine like its enemies did. State-enforced mind control, by definition, is incompatible with the principles of living in a free world. Statists, on the other hand, have no such limitations; playing mind games for them is a way of life. This makes it asymmetrical warfare.

 

Statists, of course, would like to have everything shared -- except their power. In free democracies they always demand their share of political power -- and always get what they want. However, once they are in power, they keep it to themselves and demonize the opposition.

 

The Marxist ideal of Communism is an altruistic collectivist society of the future, in which there will be no need for government, family, or private property. Freed from capitalist exploitation, people are expected to unleash their full potential and create unprecedented material abundance. The selfish notion of the pursuit of individual happiness will wither away. There will be no money, no greed, no deprivation, and, therefore, no crime.

 

 

However, since a society can't directly leap from capitalism into communism, Marx reasoned that a dictatorial socialist state would be a necessary transition in order to develop the required material base, help to spread the revolution around the world, and to condition the people's minds by uprooting greed and selfishness (or to eliminate those individuals who can't be conditioned).

Leaving the debunking of utopian follies for another time, let's just say that the totalitarian socialist state is where they always get bogged down. Despite their ideal of a stateless future, the leftists invariably become ruthless and uncompromising statists. It no longer matters whether it's a doctrinaire Marxist socialism or "corporate" fascism; if the end result is evil, original intentions don't count.

 

In Russia, the communists used to demonize their opponents long before the Revolution, which made it easier for them to physically eliminate the opposition later. As soon as they were in full control of the government, they began to demonize entire segments of the society, subcultures, and classes of people whom they deemed incapable of change.

 

Observe a visual example of communist demonization: an agitprop poster titled "Enemies of the 5-Year Plan," more broadly interpreted as "enemies of socialism" and, by extension, "enemies of the people."

 

A disparaging verse at the bottom describes who the enemies are:

 

The wealthy landowner

The kulak (a pejorative term for a wealthy farmer who "exploits" hired labor)

The drunk

The clergy (a Russian Orthodox Priest)

The bourgeois press (a non-compliant, independent journalist)

The capitalist (a banker, industrialist, merchant)

The Menshevik (a political opponent from a different communist faction)

The surviving remnants of the pre-revolutionary law enforcement and the military

The wealthy farmers, being the most numerous group and the most likely to resist the collectivization of agriculture, were subjected to the most vicious dehumanization reminiscent of the anti-Semitic propaganda in Nazi Germany.

 

 

Note this Lenin quote on another dehumanizing poster: "The kulaks are the most bestial, brutal and savage exploiters, who in the history of other countries have time and again restored the power of the landlords, tsars, priests and capitalists." (Full quote in Russian)

 

 

The demonization of the kulaks laid the groundwork for their subsequent annihilation. Facing a peasant rebellion, Lenin sent the following telegram to his henchmen: "Hang publicly (in full view of the people) no fewer than one hundred known kulaks, rich men, bloodsuckers. Make their names public. Take away all their grain. Make a list of the next group of hostages. Do it in such a fashion that for hundreds of miles around the people might see, tremble, realize, and scream: 'they are strangling, and will strangle to death, the bloodsucking kulaks'."

 

 

Other non-compliant citizens were dealt with in a similar fashion. "Statements from the few survivors, published in émigré newspapers the following year, describe Sevastopol, one of the towns that suffered most heavily under the repressions, as 'the city of the hanged.' 'From Nakhimovsky, all one could see was the hanging bodies of officers, soldiers, and civilians arrested in the streets. The town was dead, and the only people left alive were hiding in lofts or basements. All the walls, shop fronts, and telegraph poles were covered with posters calling for 'Death to the traitors.' They were hanging people for fun." -- The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression by Stephane Courtois et al, pg 107

 

 

These were not aberrations, but logical consequences of the Marxist theory. According to Karl Marx, "there is only one way to shorten and ease the convulsions of the old society and the bloody birth pangs of the new -- revolutionary terror."

Oleg Atbashian, a writer and graphic artist from the former USSR, is the author of Shakedown Socialism, of which David Horowitz said, "I hope everyone reads this book." In 1994 he moved to the U.S. with the hope of living in a country ruled by reason and common sense, appreciative of its freedoms and prosperity. To his dismay, he discovered a nation deeply infected by the leftist disease of "progressivism" that was arresting true societal progress. American movies, TV, and news media reminded him of his former occupation as a visual propaganda artist for the Communist Party -- a job he reluctantly held, as he knew that no intelligent person would take such art-by-numbers agitprop seriously. Oleg is the creator of a satirical website ThePeoplesCube.com, which Rush Limbaugh described on his show as "a Stalinist version of The Onion." His graphic work frequently appears in the American Thinker.

Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

The Show Must Go On or (IS THIS CLOWN FOR REAL?)

 Is it just me, or is this moron of a President not getting the point about Medicare, Social Security and Welfare? It has ALREADY BROKEN OUR COUNTRY for a long long time now, there's no IT WILL, IT HAS.

Every-time this moron speaks its like he's in a time warp back when it was all on paper before it DIDN'T WORK. Then he would have had an excuse to be ignorant of Consequences but not now, nothing progressives have EVER DONE HAS EVER WORKED AS PLANNED.

But instead of starting from scratch with better plans they keep gluing the same pieces together in different ways for a new result.But wait the real problem is not how stupid they are, because we all know that is their plan. The real 'itch on the sunburn' here is just how DUMB WE ARE to believe the same regurgitated lies over and over again for DECADES.

 

 

HERE IS YAHOO NEWS TODAY ABOUT THE REPUBLICANS BUDGET PLAN ( And please remember the Progressives have no REAL plan outside of more of the same failed ideas for decades.)

"President Obama on Tuesday denounced the House Republicans' recently-revealed budget plan, saying it would hurt America's working families and seniors. Tuesday's speech was the president's most thorough and direct public reaction to the plan House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., unveiled March 20.

The president, speaking at an Associated Press luncheon attended by editors and publishers, chided congressional Republicans as well as Mitt Romney and "most" of the GOP presidential field for backing the plan. The proposed cuts, Obama said, amount to 

 "thinly veiled social Darwinism."

"Instead of moderating their views even slightly, Republicans running Congress right now have doubled down," Obama said, adding that he believes the proposal is "so far to the right, it makes the Contract with America look like the New Deal."

He also knocked Republicans' belief in a trickle-down economy—where economic activity of the wealthiest Americans is relied on to boost the overall economy.

The Ryan budget's proposal to make Medicare into a partially privatized voucher system, the president said, would increase health care costs and shift the burden to America's seniors.

 "It's a bad idea and will ultimately end Medicare as we know it," he said, echoing a frequently used Democratic attack line.

He took pains to cast the current Republican Party as extreme, contrasting its approach with that taken by Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower, who he said both championed government programs as  "expressions of the fact we are one nation," rather than "some scheme to redistribute wealth."

"Reagan could not get through a Republican primary today," he said during the question and answer session.

Ryan denounced the president's speech in a statement Tuesday as pure politics, saying Obama continues to shirk responsibility for the economy and remains more focused on his re-election efforts than on offering real solutions:

Like his reckless budgets, today's speech by President Obama is as revealing as it is disappointing: While others lead by offering real solutions, he has chosen to distort the truth and divide Americans in order to distract from his failed record. His empty promises are quickly becoming broken promises — and the American people will hold him accountable for this violation of their trust.

Upon the plan's release, Ryan's proposal was immediately met by Democratic criticism. Republicans have focused on the plan's major fiscal proposals, including eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax, reducing the current six individual tax brackets to two—10 percent and 25 percent—and lowering the highest corporate tax rate from 35 to 25 percent.

Obama called out Romney by name for backing the plan, poking fun at Romney's word choice of "marvelous" to describe the proposal. "That's a word you don't often hear generally," Obama joked.

The president positioned himself and his party as the champions of the middle-class, saying Republicans and the GOP field are preoccupied with protecting the wealthiest Americans.

"I believe this is a make or break moment for the middle class," Obama said.

Obama's speech Tuesday was a preview of Democrats' 2012 election talking points. He took care to champion his administration's accomplishments, including cutting taxes for small business owners and protecting government services for low-income Americans."

news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-assails-ryan-budget-thinly-veiled-social-darwinism-150902107.html

Listen to his words carefully, he's saying that WHAT HE HAS ALREADY DONE to us is going to hurt us. He and his crony's have for the past 3 1/2 years taken this country down the very road to "Social Darwinism" so how in the world can it possibly be wrong to do more unless he's simply talking double talk to fellow morons and media bed partners. Its nothing but power and control for him; he doesn't care about us one bit!

Wow!!! "Thinly Veiled Social Darwinism"? 

Is this man for real? Did he just accuse US of what his belief system (progressive) has been doing since the early 1900's? Did he really do that?

" Obama said, adding that he believes the proposal is "so far to the right, it makes the Contract with America look like the New Deal."

 This is plainly a reversed physiology, twisting words that mean one thing to us and something completely different to him. Obama LOVED THE NEW DEAL but hate the fact a (Progressive) Republican came up with it. Its smoke and mirrors again. What ever happened to running on YOUR record? What ever happened to US HOLDING THAT LACK OF SUCCESS UP FOR THE WORLD TO SEE?

Why don't these progressive liars show some faith in their own ideas, get rid of their wealthy donators and political hacks in the media and Hollywood and come down to the ground where we are? I'll tell you why, the same reason the Republican Establishment won't do the same thing and abandon their power base.

  BOTH SIDES ARE BOLD FACED LIARS, ANTI AMERICAN BIGOTS AND WORKING TO BRING DOWN AMERICA TOGETHER, MOST OF THOSE INVOLVED DON'T KNOW THAT'S WHAT THEIR DOING BUT REST ASSURED THAT'S THE END GAME!

 I'm sorry, but this progressive system hasn't been 'Thinly Veiled', it hasn't been Veiled at all, its been openly overpowering Capitalism and destroying our Constitutional rights but WE JUST SIT BY AND LET IT EAT AWAY AT WHO WE ARE, HOPING THEY WILL SEE THE ERROR OF THEIR WAYS AND WAKE UP. 

Are we going down this same road again of believing everyone's TALKING POINTS instead of shinning the light of personal homework about what WE FOUND OUT about what their doing?

 People don't say Americans are gullible and sold out for nothing you know, Countries around the world who have experienced the PROGRESSIVE IDEAL know what we're headed for and are screaming for us to get out of the way of this train, but are we listening? 

As this three-ring circus continues, what Obama and the Republican establishment want us to hear, see and feel goes against every freedom our forefathers wanted for us to know, freedom isn't cheap and we are all throwing it away if we keep listening to the 'easy cure-all' morons in Washington DC. 

This is NOT going away, nor is it going to be easy to fix but we must stop the marry-go round OF POLITICAL LIES at some point to gain perspective on the problems, THIS IS OUR LAST CHANCE TO SAVE AMERICA FROM SELF SUICIDE.