| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Kneecapping Barack Obama at every opportunity. | ||
I was having a hard time writing this column, and then I remembered I'd plum forgot to cut eye-holes in the pillowcase I had over my head. Everybody knows we po' Southern white trash are nothin' but a bunch a' no-account, innard-eatin' night riders with a bottle of Jack in one hand, a flaming cross in the other and a tattered Bible in the third, the latter being a genetic deformity resulting from years of non-selective inbreeding and swallowing clay.
Isn't it strange how advocates of universal diversity are always the first to denigrate those who express even the mildest disagreement to the canons of liberalism? Don't you find it odd that these intellectual "elites" - who care for the rights and feelings of all living things - in fact care not at all for the lives and happiness of any who offer the slightest dissent to their robotic mantra?
Do you want proof of this politically correct pseudo-tolerance? Proof of the sham values? Proof of the blatant hypocrisy?
Good, I'm about to give it to you.
Sneaky of me, but on occasion I like to set a trap for the "bless the beasts and the children" crowd. It's one thing for me to describe how the left seeks to purloin your rights and freedoms and transform America into a nanny state. It's another thing entirely to let themselves hang by their own petard. The latter is much more telling.
Thus, over the last month, I wrote two specific columns. In the first, I made fun of Hillbillies. I utilized every hackneyed stereotype I could conjure, which wasn't hard as the non-judgmental lefties call me such stuff every week in their regular hate mail. Though all the traits I mentioned were unproved and subjective, I wondered if they would get a rise from the "tolerance" police, that group who is always quick to label conservatives as purveyors of "hate speech" or "racism" or "bigotry."
Guess what? Judging by direct responses (and what I could gather via searching web archives of the editorial pages in which I appear) there was not one single complaint. Keep in mind I was "attacking" a group whom the left claims to defend. You know, the ones they refer to as, "the common folk," and the "regular people." Though I received many e-mails commenting that they thought the essay was hilarious, the outrage needle remained at zero.
Was I surprised? Of course not. Rural people are primarily conservative. They usually own guns and have a sense of humor. They work hard and don't seek government hand-outs. By and large they support traditional American values. I was simply curious as to whether "Enlightened Liberals" would live up to their stated convictions of defending ALL people equally, regardless of race, creed, color or conviction. They didn't.
So I wrote a second column. I decided to poke fun at the French, but utilized historical fact as the basis for the column. After all, the French DO share the values of much of the American left. They prefer big government, socialist institutions and a sort of self-serving pacifism. They vent spleen against an armed citizenry and are quite arrogant in believing their system superior to all others. Most of the classic French political outlook could be viewed as a Xerox copy of the platforms endorsed by the Democratic National Committee.
And what was the response to that column? The liberals went wild. Utilizing ad hominem arguments they made the leap from my satire on the French to claiming I hated African Americans, Jews and Native Americans (something which highly amused my African American, Jewish and Native American friends). They took the opportunity to slam me personally on the letters pages and call for my banishment. You would have thought I'd shot their dog, if it weren't for the fact that most liberals own cats. It was flat out hilarious.
Granted, a few moderate folk did write polite notes saying that I might have crossed the line, and dozens of readers sent me French jokes. But the greatest response by far was from rabid left-wingers who sought to brand me as Hitler's nephew.
But the point was made! Liberals only display public affront when less than flattering comments are made about those with whom they share a political or ideological affiliation. The DO NOT celebrate diversity. The celebrate it only for those they deem worthy. They DO NOT seek equality for all. They seek equality only for those who will grovel at their feet and praise their wisdom. Those voicing opposition are categorized as something less than the dirt beneath their feet. They support freedom of speech only when the speech in question fits their exact specifications.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. The only difference between the extreme right and the extreme left lies in fashion trends. The former wears a sheet and hobnailed boots and smokes a cigar, whereas the latter sports an earring and Birkenstocks and tokes on a joint.
As for me, I'm still a Hillbilly. And, though I'm not really fond of the French, I do like their pastry.
Uhhh...Pop Tarts come from France...right?
If you liked this article by Ron Marr, you can read more of his work at the Trout Wrapper
|
|||||
|
|
| |||
