Part 1: Who Owns Your Money?
...A tax cut is like a generous concession on the part of a Feudal Lord to one of his serfs: he doesn't have to do it but he does out of generosity. Yet, the money we are talking about does not belong to Nancy Peolosi or the Federal Government but to the individuals who earned it. It is their money. And it is not needed for the legitimate operation of the government for the common good (defence, police, roads etc.) but for the purpose of redistribution by Government according to socialist ideology.Part 2: Why The Tea Partiers "Must" Be Racist?
Ultimately, Pelosi regards all the wealth as belonging to the Government and its job is to decide how much to let each citizen keep.
The Left, of course, is obsessed with race: racial quotas, affirmative action, victimization. The Left has nothing but scorn for Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream of a color blind society, which makes their faux outrage over Glenn Beck using Martin Luther King Jr. Day for his Restoring Honor rally on the Washington Mall a pile of hypocrisy. They left "Uncle Martin" behind a long time ago and his only use to them now is as a symbol into which they pour their radical ideology.And finally, an essay by Carson Holloway - "The Sources of Liberal Intolerance":
So maybe it is just cynical, gutter-level, street fighting politics. But there is a problem with this theory. While it explains why the hard core Left makes the accusation of racism, it does not explain why more moderate, less ideological and more sincerely motivated people buy into it.
Liberal intolerance is rooted in a secular disregard for the dignity of individuals, coupled with the veneration of Progress and the belief that liberal ideologies can’t win in public debate.Right on! We've seen how "eager" the pro-aborts are to defend their views in an open debate. When it comes to other sacred cows of today's left, their reaction is quite similar - it's a human rights (or a social justice) issue, doubting (let alone - discussing) human rights and social justice is racist, fascist, discriminatory etc; participating in such a debate would be humiliating to a true "progressive", thus - no debate is or will be allowed, period.
...We must remember that contemporary liberalism is not classical 19th century liberalism, but is a form of liberalism that has surrendered in large part to socialist thinking. Contemporary liberalism allows Marxists to pose as insiders to Western political systems rather than appearing as an outside enemy seeking to destroy the system. The intolerance of contemporary liberalism arises out of the mixing of revolutionary Marxism with liberal thought to create something antithetical to the Western tradition.Straight and to the point.