Liberalism May be Dead but Librulism is Not

Opinion Forum ^ | November 11, 2010 | Dan Miller

[DanMiller]

Roger L. Simon recently opined that Liberalism is Dead. He referred to modern liberalism rather than to classical liberalism. However, it and its proponents remain forces about which to be concerned. Unfortunately, modern liberalism a.k.a. Librulism may even now be more alive than classical liberalism.

Libruls do and say strange things which liberals generally do not. Libruls are fond of the word “racist” and conflate it with opposition to Librul positions. In Librulspeak, it is “racist” not to consider race in hiring and promoting employees and for other purposes; some but not all consideration of race is called “affirmative action” and “affirmative” presumably connotes something good. Republicans, unlike Democrats, are racist. So are those fool conservative T.E.A. groups which supported LTC Allen West who, due to a clear victory in a heavily White district, will in January become the first Black Republican congressman from Florida since Reconstruction; they just gotta be racist. So must Republican Hispanics Marco Rubio and David Rivera in Florida as well as Susana Martinez in New Mexico and Brian Sandoval in Nevada; ditto their supporters. There is no depth of depravity to which those Uncle Tom racists and their enablers will not descend.

Much of Europe is in the midst of a Librul crisis; Greece, France, anyone? To a lesser but still growing and festering extent so is the United States; yet President Obama apparently wants to emulate them; we must become more Librul and thwart the Party of No.

I suggest that the crisis has been propelled in no small way by the politically correct misuse of language. Political correctness is a symbiotic encrustation on Librulism; I don’t know which is a cause and which is an effect, but neither could probably exist without the other.

[DanMiller]

In the article, I quoted myself as follows:

I elect to use the word “liberal” to connote an open but not empty mind, a tendency to encourage the expression of opposing views, to listen attentively to them, and to desire to become familiar with them regardless of whether they are agreeable. It suggests a rational rather than a dogmatic approach to reality. A “liberal” in this sense can also be conservative; a conservative can, by the same token, be a “liberal;” there is no contradiction in terms.

Libruls have managed to take over the word Liberal, pretending to portend all of the good it implies while countering its very essence. On November 2nd the country made some progress away from Librulism toward liberalism. Such progress is good, but it needs to continue and not be wiped away by apathy now that the elections have been held. One thing to do would be to refrain from political correctism. Saying No to it would be a good start to restoring a bit of pride in our country.

[tx_eggman]

Hey, I get it now ...[/sarc off

[bitterohiogunclinger]

Liberal or Librul, it has been my experience that neither are open to ideas outside their preconceived notions. The only difference I detect is that “Liberals” pretend to listen while “Libruls” flap their gums going “Nyah Nyah Nyah” the whole time anyone else is speaking to prevent the possibility of any words accidentally landing on their consciousness and disrupting their fragile psyche.

[Candor7]

Librulism = Liberal Fascism

Imperative:Read this if you haven't

Librules want rule by political correctness, not law.

Will they fight for their beliefs? What is the measure of their resolve? ( These are the questions we now should be asking. Answering them will allow us to defeat them.)

Libruls are now intent on destroying the economy of the United States, simply because they cannot form their fascist Utopia without doing that.

[Le Chien Rouge]

Liberals/Lefties NEVER die——they just evolve into something else.

Example: All the Communist who entered into the environmental movement after the Fall of their beloved Soviet Union.

We must be ever vigilant.

[Mobilemitter]

"Librules want rule by political correctness, not law. Will they fight for their beliefs? What is the measure of their resolve?"

Librules just want to rule....period. They have no 'beliefs' other than those which will elevate and sustain their position of authority. As such, they consider the constructs of our Constitution as evil because it elevates the liberty of the individual while restraining those who would establish tyranny.

[Candor7]

Yes, but you miss my point. Will they fight for what they want, using force majeur? Inquiring minds want to know.

[DanMiller]

I attempted in the article to distinguish liberals and libruls. As I use the terms, liberalism is inconsistent with leftism, Communism, etc. Librulism is consistent with both. Sir Winston Churchill referred to himself as a conservative liberal and a liberal conservative; he was right on both points.