Friday, September 02, 2005

Damaged Goods

So now we know what motivates those on the Left: the same things that motivate all children, whether physically “grown-up” or not. But why did they stay in that stage of permanent childhood, while the rest of us grew up?

The theory that I’ve heard most often is that of “liberal guilt”. The thinking goes that, somehow, these liberals feel guilty for leading “privileged” lives while others are leading lives of destitution.

I’m sorry, but that just doesn’t make any sense.

First of all, most of the Lefties that I’ve seen, such as protestors, college kids, etc., aren’t all leading “privileged” lives. In fact, other than the “limousine liberals”, most of them are from lower to middle-class backgrounds. Yes, they had more than the “poor” people that they supposedly champion do, but most of them were far from rich. Certainly not rich enough for them to feel terribly guilty about having so much more than the “poor”.

On top of that, the liberals that I’ve known are the most selfish, self-centered people on this earth. Like a child, everything relates to them. Even their attempts to help the “downtrodden” are nothing more than an attempt to make them feel good about themselves.

How could they feel “guilt” about another person’s plight when they are obsessed with their own feelings and position?

So, why have these people never grown beyond the emotional level of children? I actually touched on it in one of the above posts, but I didn’t quite realize the significance at the time.

A psychologist I once knew told me that a lot of people's emotional progression stops at a certain traumatic point in their lives.

And there you have it. Scratch a liberal deep enough and you’ll find some traunatic experience that stopped their emotional growth. Something that they’ve never been able to deal with. Bullying, molestation, overly-critical parents? Who knows? It explains everything, though.

It explains why they all seem to be pissed off and depressed. Think about it: have you ever met one who wasn’t? They may try to hide it, but if you look closely, you can see it in all of them. Al Franken, Michael Moore, Al Gore? Hell, Bill Clinton’s self-destructive streak alone tells me that I’m right.

These people really don’t like themselves very much no matter what they may project to the world. They say that all comedy contains a grain of truth. Methinks Al Franken’s “Stuart Smalley” character contained more than a grain or two of truth.

It explains why everything has to be somebody’s fault. There has to be a “victimizer” that represents whatever traumatized these people. There is no such thing as an accident or, as in the case of Hurricane Katrina, a natural disaster. Somebody must be blamed (and, hopefully, sued). In the case of Katrina, they’re already blaming President Bush for not signing the Kyoto treaty and for not having massive federal aid waiting just outside the hurricane zone.

It explains why they hate the same things that all children hate. Spanking children is a crime. Bullies are the epitome of evil. There is "right" (i.e. whatever makes you feel good), but nothing is ever "wrong". Feeling bad about yourself (low self-esteem), even briefly, is about the worst thing in the world.

Yes, plenty of people on the Right have been traumatized in one way or another, but we managed to deal with it and grow up to become responsible adults.

But the people on the Left are damaged goods who are incapable of dealing with their issues and, therefore, will never grow up. They have, apparently, become comfortable with their baggage and have turned it into a political agenda.

“Liberal guilt” is a myth. These people don’t feel guilty about their position relative to “the poor”. Perhaps they feel guilty about not dealing with whatever or whomever traumatized them in their past, but they certainly don’t feel guilty abut their position. If they did, Barbara Streisand, Rosie O’Donnell and all of the other rich Lefties would give their vast fortunes to these people whom they supposedly care so much about.

But they don’t really care about “the poor”. They found out that people saw them in a good light for sounding off for the “less fortunate”, and that affirmation was like crack for these “self-esteem-challenged” people. It was a way for them to not only feel good about themselves, but to get a desperately-craved “atta-boy” from others.

As I said in one of the previous posts, I don't think that it's a coincidence that, if you look at these liberals, you can see inside them the kids in school who were constantly picked on. They all look "off" somehow.

These people have finally found a "society", amongst all of the other misfits, where they fit in. After spending a huge part of their lives thinking that they were the only ones who felt that way, they were ecstatic to find a place where they belonged.

After being refused entry into all of the cliques, they have finally found their own.

No comments:

Post a Comment