One of the interesting things about Progressives is that they often don’t even consider any alternate view outside their blinder-narrowed field of vision. For instance, in the words of on Obamacare Navigator (who we pay to help get people to sign up for Obamacare):
“I just thought it was very wrong that people didn’t have health care,” Yannone says. “That’s it. That’s not a political agenda. I mean, I don’t even know what a political agenda is. It’s injustice to have people losing their homes and being stuck in terrible jobs that they hate, just because of insurance, or terrible relationships, abusive relationships, because of lack of health care.
In her mind, saying it’s “unjust” for people not to have health care isn’t a “political agenda.” Another example: In a story about being a work from home mom, Karen Alpert says it’s the worst of all possible worlds, because she’s there, but she has to tell her children to leave her alone while she’s working. Her assumption is obviously that the most important thing she can teach her children is that mommy is always there — in other words, that the world revolves around them, and her emotions about them. Forget teaching them that work is an important part of life, and that you have to learn to balance work and family no matter where you work. In another episode of progressive belly button gazing, there is now a huge argument breaking out over whether Bonhoeffer was gay or not. Let me explain something really slowly to the progressives reading this… Not everyone in the world defines their entire worldview, friends, foods, cars, and voting pattern based on their what they desire in the way of sex. In fact, the evidence is that Bonhoeffer was a virgin when he died, and that he was engaged to a young woman — that he was just a man who had deep friendships with other men. When we stretch every situation to find some ulterior sexual preference, we’ve just lost track of the real world.
On the Obamacare front:
Some folks just don’t know what the word “safe” means. Safe for the illegals crossing the border (it’s not), safe for the people living on the border (it’s not), or safe for liberals pushing their agenda?
Why do Jews vote so consistently Democrat? “American Jews overwhelmingly tend to vote Democrat for one simple reason: they see the choice as being between 1) the Democrats and their belief in nothing versus 2) the Republicans and their beliefs based on their Christian faith and heritage.”
We clearly have an obsession with female barrenness — from the way things look, to our insistence on abortion, to out view of modern government as the childless nurse acting as a “mother” to the entire ward. As the Federalist points out:
The logic of neutral male rationality, gendered but sexless, has given way to the logic of therapeutic administration—prefigured by Nurse Ratched in One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest. Big Nurse, as she’s otherwise known, is a transitional figure between the old American regime and the new. A former Army nurse, Ratched is machine-like, robotic, bent on total control and orthogonal order. In that sense, she still inhabits the world of unsexed, male-gendered rationalism. But that should not mask the sea change that Ken Kesey detected. Goethe, as Philip Rieff reminds us, considered it “a fact that humanity will ultimately triumph”; he only feared, however, “that at the same time the world will become one great hospital in which one man will be the other’s humane nurse.” Social order, Goethe predicted, would become more female in gender; but in its rationalization and universalization, it would become female in an unsexed way. In place of the old regime’s male-gendered rule, defined by its figurative sterility, the new officialdom gives us female-gendered rule—defined by its figurative barrenness.
A constant meme on the progressive left is that religion is bad for people, given the wars started in the name of religion (and ignoring the number of people killed in the name of attempting to build the socialist utopia), the sexual repression of religion, etc. It turns out that, at least in the case of marriage, it’s not religion that’s the problem. It’s playing at being religious — religion as a culture, rather than religion as an actual worldview. I suspect this is true across the board.
Want to know how those climate reports are really written? Governments spend a lot of time trying to change the contents to get the message of “big government is really needed to solve this climate problem” across as forcefully as possible. And you thought it was all about science…