Liberalism = Intolerance

Counter to conventional wisdom?  Sure.  But totally accurate:

I'm sitting here thinking more about the ideology of intolerance, the classic liberal. That intolerant teacher in North Carolina was a bully, telling her students that it was criminal to criticize Obama. You know, when you get right down to it, maybe one of the best ways to explain liberalism to the uninitiated is to simply say that it is intolerant. It's a philosophy of "no." It's a philosophy of domination and "no," and it's not at all what people think it is.

It's not open-mindedness. It's not tolerance. It's not good intentions. It's not sweetness and light and love and all that. It's a philosophy of "no." It is intolerant. Socialism, fascism, communism, all forms of liberalism dictate behavior. You must conform. Individuals? Private businesses? You must conform to what they say. And if you don't they'll pass laws and regulations that force you to. And in order to have uniformity, there must be an enforcement mechanism, because people are not the same.

People don't want the same things. They don't believe the same things. But if you are going to have uniformity -- which is what liberalism wants, 'cause that's equality to them: Everybody being the same. Outcomes especially. Being the same. Nobody richer than anybody else. If you are to have that, you must have an enforcement mechanism that shuts down what? Creativity, choice, and innovation. You have to shut down all the things that differentiate people.

And in a free society, the things that differentiate people are creativity, choice, and innovation. And that has to be shut down. That is why, folks, an ever-expanding government is job one for liberals. Whatever expands government, whatever makes it bigger: Global warming, feminism, amnesty for illegals, whatever. Whatever needs more regulation, whatever needs more control, is sought "for the common good" and uniformity.

"It's all for the common good," they say. But anything that grows the government, that's job number one for liberals.

Government is the enforcement mechanism.

Government is the practical manifestation of the ideology of "no."

Government is where the intolerance is.

Government is the all-powerful engine that prevents innovation and choice and creativity.

Look at that slideshow that Obama did: Julia. That's how you remake millions of individuals in 50 states into a faceless cartoon. You have a cartoon for your own reelection and you come up with a fictional character: Julia, the average American woman who turns to government at every stage of her life when she needs or wants something. Not a husband, not a family, not a church, but to the government.

The government makes her birth possible.

The government makes her prenatal care possible.

The government makes her garden possible.

Except it's not hers. It's a "community garden."

So now you have Obama dictating a uniform health insurance policy that has to be purchased by all Americans. HAS TO BE! It's enforced by a fine. It says "no" to individual needs and wants. If you don't want health insurance, that doesn't matter. You have to buy it. If you don't buy it, there is a fine. A moratorium on drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico. That is the government saying "no." And the enforcement mechanism is the government.

"No" to jobs.

"No" to cheap energy.

Regulations are variations of the "Just say 'no'" theme. Regulations are how liberals "just say 'no.'" Regulations are how they enforce their own intolerance. Regulations and laws are how they enforce their mandated behavioral codes. Obama has said "no" to any budgets. The Democrat Party has said "no" to budgets. Obama has said "no" to the Keystone pipeline. Obama has said "no" to reforming entitlements! He has said "no" to doing anything about runaway debt.

It's all "Shut up and sit down, America! Do as I say and there won't be any trouble."

And that's what liberalism is.

It all stems from a mind-set of intolerance.

"Don't you criticize Obama! That's criminal! You can't criticize a sitting president! That's sedition; you can't do it."

And the student says, "It's free speech, my First Amendment right."

"There isn't one here!"

So liberalism is a mind-set of total control. It's why our schools now favor indoctrination over education. See, freedom of thought is bad to them. We see example after example, be it what you bring from home for lunch or what you say. Lunch from home is not even tolerable! What you bring from home for lunch, a federal agent can regulate! Uniformity is the goal. That's liberalism, where the people reflect and represent the views of the state, not their own.

For yet another view of liberal intolerance in action, take this YouTube video that made quite the splash yesterday that captured audio of some high school students being bullied by their teacher about Obama (***language warning***):

If you can't watch the video, here's a partial transcript:

So, how bad was the exchange? It got fairly heated, with the teacher shouting at times. The kerfuffle started after one student asked a question about the teacher’s  “fact of the day” that said Romney was a bully back in high school. A student asked:

“Didn’t Obama bully somebody, though?”

The teacher started to get angry and said:

“Not to my knowledge.”

A couple of students relayed the story about Obama admitting that he bullied someone when he was younger. And that seemed to light the fuse on his teacher’s anger. A couple of the students exchanged words with the angry teacher.

“Stop! Stop! Because there’s no comparison. He’s running for president. Obama is the president.”

As one student attempted to argue for a fair, two-sided debate on the history of the candidates, he was shouted down and talked over by the teacher. She continued:

“You got to realize, this man is wanting to be what Obama is. There’s no comparison.”

Once again, the students pressed for equal discussion of the histories of both men, with one saying:

“If you’re gonna talk trash about one side, you gotta talk trash about the other.”

The teacher just seemed to dig her heels in deeper and press her defense of Obama telling the defiant teen:

“You will not disrespect the president of the United States in this classroom.”

Again the student persisted and invoked his First Amendment right.

“I’ll say what I want.”

The still unidentified teacher read the student her rules…her Obama rules.

“Not about him, you won’t!”

The back and forth continued and the most strident of the two students reminded his teacher that President Bush was constantly treated to negative statements about him while he was in office:

“Whenever Bush was president, everybody talked sh-t about him.”

To which the teacher responded:

“Because he was sh-tty.”

The social studies educator went on for a full minute with more ranting, saying that people were arrested for saying derogatory things about President Bush. The student correctly reminded the teacher that opinions are protected, but you cannot be arrested unless you threaten the president.

Our research has not turned up a single case of anyone in America being arrested for speaking ill of former President Bush. The local newspaper story also mentioned that their discussions about the story with a political science professor could not recall the arrests that the teacher was speaking about.

In my humble opinion, it's hard to envision a better example of blind intolerance than this.