Much has been made by many in the liberal establishment regarding torture allegedly inflicted at the hands of American captors against suspected terrorist captives. Beyond the mere velocity with which some liberals defend our enemies, however, far more can be gleaned from the sheer contextual and perceptual expansion of just exactly what constitutes “torture” as defined by liberals. This extension of what torture is gives us both a clear view of liberal hypocrisy and an ironic peek at liberal foolishness.
The original definition of torture as the use of “extreme measures that could cause death or serious injury to a suspect” certainly seems reasonable in view of our self-perception and ideals. However, many have observed that a good number of liberals have been at the forefront of expanding this definition to include such things as humiliation, discomfort, loud noises and sleep deprivation.
That some liberals would wish to expand the definition of torture should not surprise anyone acquainted with their perception of life, as life seems to be a torture in and of itself. After all, have we not seen how twisted and distorted these liberals become when anyone dares to contradict or challenge their social, political, moral and cultural genius? Anyone wishing to experience first-hand what impatience really means need only look at how these exasperated liberals frown at the slightest disagreement with their point of view on any topic. It must truly be torture for God’s chosen liberal elite to deal with all of the lesser creatures around them.
Just look at the way Sen. Obama referred to bitter people who “cling” to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them. Such patronizing arrogance is typical of such liberals. They lump religious people, average Americans and people who want to protect this country into one giant pile of mindless, superstitious and ignorant hicks that society has the misfortune of having to deal with on a daily basis. (Note that Obama’s comments were not meant for public consumption.)
Show me a liberal who is not protesting, whining or wailing about some injustice or defect of American society and I will show you one bored liberal. It is almost as if their entire reason for existence, the validation for their spews, is a view of society as an endless torture. Simply put, what do you call a liberal in paradise? Apparently a liberal who has made a wrong turn somewhere.
Perceptive observers point to Waco as a classic example of the selective and hypocritical nature of liberal torture perceptions. If truth be told, a number of liberals – especially the ultra left who seem to dominate the Democrat party now – define torture differently depending on who is conducting the torture and who is receiving it.
For these liberals, an American soldier throwing muffins at someone is torture.
Those same liberals, however, will define a terrorist who is slitting throats, decapitating heads, stoning women or blowing up innocent women and children as someone who is expressing his cultural, religious and social frustration. These same liberals perceive a Christian publicly quoting Scripture as torture, but any atheist publicly pronouncing disgust against religion as defensible free speech.
Show me American blood being shed and I will assure you some these same liberals will describe that blood as shed in response to Americans torturing someone somewhere. Tell the liberal that this same blood belongs to one of America’s enemies and you will hear a discourse on how that blood was shed due to torture at American hands. Either way, these liberals define torture as inflicted by Americans and its consequences as laid at the feet of those same Americans. To listen to these people is to believe that America is the torture factory of the world.
This is part of a pattern with a number of liberals. They blatantly define torture, free speech, injustice, hate speech and religious intolerance as they see fit and as conforms to their biased view of the world, often in spite of clear and convincing contradictions and inconsistencies in their evidence. There are three possible reasons for this obvious, selective hypocrisy. The first is that these liberals are so clueless as to be blind to their own biased inconsistency and contradiction. The second is that they are delusional individuals so steeped in their own bias as to be blind to its sheer audacity. The third and final possibility is that liberals are such arrogant elitists that they actually perceive themselves as having the moral and intellectual right to make up rules as they go along.
I tend to favor a combination of the second and third possibilities, although I can see how some people believe that being a true liberal requires a unique blend of cluelessness, delusion and arrogance.
Given the nature and history of the great expanding and shrinking definition of torture as defined by some liberals in the context of their situational needs, one finds an amazingly ironic situation unfolding before one’s eyes. As these liberals dilute their definition of torture from deadly violence and force to humiliation to discomfort, perhaps they will choose to continue their spiral toward absurdity. Maybe torture will soon be defined as interrupting a liberal’s comment, daring to rebuke a liberal’s rant or refusing to kiss a liberal’s feet (or worse).
Certainly we now see that torture appears to include mentioning the Bible in any way except to confirm and support certain liberal views, exhibiting any kind of patriotism or pride in one’s country, daring to argue that illegal aliens should not be handed the keys to the kingdom or refusing to accept that America is the worst thing that ever happened to this planet.
We see how likeminded liberals already are tortured by competition in the marketplace of ideas and how they feel tortured that their views are not universally accepted. They seem to feel tortured by the very existence of talk radio and conservative websites. Truly, then, this liberal expansion of what it means to be tortured is merely a reflection of their view of life as one long torture, this country as one large torture mill and exposure to anything but their selective views as intellectual torture.
The expansion of the definition of torture as defined by certain liberals is one of the most ironic developments of our current society. Here we have people who want to turn a wink in public into sexual torture, an opposing speech into intellectual torture, the Bible into religious torture, conservative views into political torture and a cruel word into interrogational torture. Yet, incredibly, these same people have already unwittingly expanded the boundaries of torture without even realizing it.
After all, imagine being tied to a chair and forced to listen to The View, any leading liberal, mainstream media’s brand of objectivity or most celebrities spew for hours about anything. Now if that is not torture, then Rosie O’Donnell, Whoopi Goldberg and Barbara Walters will endorse John McCain next week.