Like I always say, never underestimate both the stupidity of liberals and their burning desire to show it. Gastell comments on my feather ruffling article, “Beware The Mexican Strawberries?“. I will rebut his comments as follows:
“Mr. Jackson is ideologically consistent, but is political naive in the extreme.”
Translation: I am extreme because I believe in the Constitution and think the government should get out of doing unconstitutional things. What? How utterly stupid right?
“Regardless of ideologies or variations in the forms of government, all governments trade benefits for support. This process is essential if government is to exist at all. The various political ideologies differ with respect to the identities of the beneficiaries, but that is all.”
Gastell believes in the European political spectrum where “liberals” are communists and “conservatives” are the socialists and he cannot understand how anyone would even be further to the right than that and consider promoting a political ideology where people do not buy influence by throwing money at political constituencies. Thus, everything to follow is going to be a little bumbling and hard to follow but I will lead you through his muddled thoughts.
“Thus, historically, conservatives have distributed benefits to businesses of various kinds, or to whole industries, in exchange for support from those recipients.”
Gastell confuses conservatives with liberal Republicans here. This is something that political neophytes particularly on the left do with regularity because they don’t know any better. Therefore he thinks that when a liberals Republican, who often proclaim themselves to be conservative but whose deeds prove otherwise, supports farm subsidies, he thinks that they represent conservatives in practice.
And of course Gastell is blind to the truth. He thinks hard core liberals like himself don’t feed government money to business. But witness President Obama and his bailout of the automobile industries, Wall Street and his fervent support for bank bailout through TARP. Before that it was hard core liberals like Barney Frank who ran interference for Fannie and Freddie as they fed money to mortgage companies and who even liberal Republicans like President George W. Bush were smart enough to warn about and sought to stop this practice.
Now, maybe Gastell does not see President Obama as liberal. That would only make Gastell even more confused and naive.
“Over here on the left, we differ largely in terms of the identities of the groups or elements of the population we believe should benefit.”
What Gastell really means is others like him on the “far left” differ in the groups they believe should benefit from those on the “near left”. He doesn’t really understand conservatism at all. But he wants to think he does.
See previous proofs of how hard core liberals support businesses with subsidies.
“Of course, at the level of ideological argument, conservatives often oppose such a vision of government,”
Well which is it? Do we oppose it or do we support it? Previously Gastell said we supported it. Now he says we oppose it? No wonder he is confused. Although he stumbled into the truth for a brief moment here, he doesn’t even know it because to know it would require him to admit his previous argument is sheer bunk.
“but if real-world conservatives want to get into office and stay there, they must play the game as it really is, not as their ideological opinion-shapers fantasize it to be.”
Again, Gastell believes in that anything short of socialism fails because anything short of socialism doesn’t pay off the voters enough to win their support. Gastell believes everyone desires a yoke around their neck which is a common theme among liberals. He might well find one day that it is his neck in the yoke as he and his fellow travelers are driven out of the country by a fed up populace who are determined to reclaim their liberties.
As a liberal though, he will still believe that you really wanted that yoke all along even as he wears it instead.
RSS Feed
Loading ...