blackandred

“What to Expect from a Liberal Argument”
Or
“Bill Buckley:Arianna Huffington::J.S. Bach:Christina Aguilera”
By: J. Thomas Hunter

John McCain decided that it was finally proper to denounce Pastor John Hagee and reject the preacher’s endorsement. What a shame! It’s moves like this that make it so tough for his conservative constituency to fully embrace him. Has Hagee said some stupid things? Sure. Who hasn’t? Why, then, is it wrong for McCain to denounce him? Because by doing so, McCain has accepted the liberal premise that John Hagee is as poisonous as Rev. Jeremiah Wright! Oh, Liberals!

The only thing the two men have in common is their gender! Wright’s theology is so heretical as to hardly call him Christian at all. Hagee apologized for his controversial comments. Wright did not. In fact, Wright simply reinforced them at his appearance before the National Press Club. Hagee was never named the spiritual mentor of any presidential candidate. Wright was. Hagee didn’t preside over McCain’s marriage, baptize McCain’s children, or influence the title of McCain’s biography. Wright did each for prominent Democratic presidential candidate, Barack Obama. John McCain didn’t attend Hagee’s church for two decades, but Obama spent that much time with a racist, anti-Semitic, anti-American preacher named Jeremiah Wright.

So why do liberals compare the two relationships to the extent that McCain thought it necessary to distance himself from Hagee as Barack Obama did from Jeremiah Wright?

Because liberals are ridiculous.

There is a whole list of non-sequitur arguments liberals make in order to debate conservatives. Only in the mainstream media, American universities, and other liberal strongholds do these arguments hold water. Some of these unparallel analogies are explored and ridiculed here.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) compare horse racing to dog fighting:

On May 3rd, competing for the Kentucky Derby, Eight Belles, the racing horse, sustained a fatal injury and was euthanized before a crowd of shocked onlookers. Two days later, PETA president, Ingrid E. Newkirk, wrote a public letter to Democratic presidential nominee, Hillary Clinton to “step up immediately and condemn it.” In Newkirk’s view, “Horse racing is as indefensible as dog fighting.”

Horse racing as indefensible as dog fighting? If you’re not scratching your head trying to fit this square peg through the triangular hole, you may be a liberal—or maybe you just don’t know what dog fighting is, or what horse racing is. Dog fighting is when people take dogs (some stolen) mistreat them, and pit them against each other in a bloody fight to the death. Death is the point.

Horse racing, on the other hand, is when horses do what they do naturally—run, albeit in circles. The horse that wins hopefully lives to race another day.

The similarities are…nowhere.

What can you expect from the organization who called meat-eating “The Holocaust on your plate”?

Analogy denied.

The homosexual struggle for marriage is equivalent to the black struggle for civil rights.

Of all the things that annoys me about the organized gay movement, nothing grates me more than the claim that the gay struggle is synonymous with the black struggle.

I had no idea Neil Patrick Harris was gay until he told us. As it were, I didn’t care to know either. However, I know his skin color from a mile away. During the years of “separate but equal” he and I would drink from separate water fountains. Today, there are no gay fountains. Gays don’t have the same history of oppression that blacks have—indeed, when trying to convince people that their lifestyle is natural, they insist that it was a chosen sexual choice during ancient times. Blacks wanted basic rights, gays want their lifestyle to be validated.

Where is the similarity beyond people wanting something?

Barring a good challenge—analogy denied.

Islamic terrorists are misunderstood freedom fighters.

Ed Schultz made this claim while debating Michael Medved in Minnesota. But Schultz isn’t alone—liberals make this claim often enough that it needs addressing. Cindy Sheehan called the insurgents freedom fighters in 2005.

Is there anything respectable about killing innocents, hiding in mosques, and committing atrocities against the very people you claim to be defending? Did American patriots do the same thing? Don’t we look down on the French Revolution during its senseless violence stage?

Are Islamic terrorists really congruent to freedom fighters?

Denied. Again.

These analogies are everywhere, and we should look forward to liberals doing this forever. To them, Michelle Obama is as polarizing as Cindy McCain, Iraq is Vietnam, fighting global warming is as important as fighting Japanese Imperialism, and Jeremiah Wright is as “prophetic” as Isaiah. It only takes a moment to refute their silliness, but it can be as frustrating as defending John McCain while decrying his liberal arguments.

Article Sources: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/05/peta-writes-to.html; http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45938

Photo Sources: “Hagee and Wright” from http://www.thejewishweek.com/; “Horse Racing” from http://www.pasthepost.com/; “Dog fight winner” from http://atatude.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/dog.jpg; “Neil Patrick Harris” from www.monstersandcritics.com;

Trackback URI | Comments RSS