Do As I Say, Not As I Do

Mobile Post

Three stories in the news today add to the massive stockpile of evidence that sanctimonious liberals want you to 'do as I say, not as I do'. It should no longer come as any surprise to anyone that liberals who supposedly want to make the world a better place by helping the poor, helping the environment or helping the children or elderly, want their efforts to affect a change in how people behave but they themselves, expect to be exempt from that set of rules they want to see imposed.

The obvious example is Al Gore jetting around the world to spew global warming propaganda - and jet exhaust. And what is with his home that uses something like a trillion kilowatts of power every second and burns more natural gas than a fleet of natural-gas-powered buses (yes, that's an exaggeration)? Shouldn't he be living in a tiki hut somewhere?

And now comes word (courtesy of Hot Air, in turn courtesy of the American Spectator) that radical community activist group ACORN is involved in a project, under the pretense of helping the poor, of displacing the poor for a mega-project involving the New Jersey Nets.

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/07/09/acorn-sells-out-the-poor

«In the world of corporate shakedowns it is commonplace for liberal activist groups to use the money they extract from a supposed "donor" to fund operations, but it is very unusual for a group to take money in exchange for betraying those it is supposed to represent.

But the far-left activist group ACORN, which claims to defend the poor from what ACORN ally Rep. John Conyers (D-Michigan) last year called America's "capitalist predators," is doing precisely that. "»

For anyone who missed the hypocrisy, let me spell it out for you. The organization that tries to enforce community standards on organizations it deems as too capitalistic, feels it's okay to violate those standards itself because, after all, ACORN knows what's best for America, so the ends justify the means.

And that's the problem with liberal activists in a nutshell. They have a deeply held opinion that they know what is best for America and for the world. No one else understands. And since they are the guardians of what is right and pure its okay for them to violate their own moral compass. Just not you.

Which brings us to our second story from Deceiver.com. Again a Hat Tip to Hot Air.

http://deceiver.com/2009/07/08/greenpeace-cleans-up-environment-by-littering/

That's right, Greenpeace decided the best way to stop global warming was to litter. And to illegally scale Mt. Rushmore. It's a double whammy of hypocrisy; don't wreck the earth, but it's okay if we do AND let's get President Obama to change the laws for tougher global warming rules and penalties by breaking the law.

The chain of double standards gets clearer the more you pay attention.

Next story. Again, a hat tip to Hot Air - the only site among those I regularly frequent that I have had a chance to visit this morning, which should by now be obvious to readers of this post.

From PDN

http://www.pdnpulse.com/2009/07/new-york-times-magazine-withdraws-possibly-altered-photo-essay.html

This one is yet to be confirmed but sure appears to be the case. The New York Times, bastion of truth (as liberals see it) has run a photo caption contest in a clear effort to remain viable in an online world. No problem there, other than the reason they are in financial trouble is not because they don't have a valid online business model - its because they are blatantly biased and not always factual. That's a problem with a newspaper. They are supposed to report news - they are not called an editorial paper, news should be primary.

But the bigger problem is this, after a recent history of made up stories, you'd think they would bend over backwards to be truthful. But the photo caption contest photos were doctored. Either the Times has a shortage of editors and fact checkers or else they don't care to check facts if it interrupts their narrative.
Given their blatant bias in ideology its hard to believe it isn't deliberate. And if that is the case the NYT has abandoned journalism for advocacy. An organization that demands full disclosure and wants to be regarded as a source of truth is being dishonest. They would howl if they caught Fox News lying or making a factual mistake. So, do as they say, not as they do.

But I'm willing to give the NYT the benefit of the doubt. They did pull the photos, even if it was because they were caught in a lie/mistake. Mistakes happen. The problem is that their political bent lends itself to continued errors. And they seem to want to be bailed out with TARP money. But they don't want to change their business model. They don't want to be about accuracy and facts. And still, cutting the Times some slack, there's hypocrisy on their part.

And there are other examples. Think of the Supreme court overturning the Sotomayor 'reverse discrimination'. Discrimination is bad if you are doing it against a non-caucasian but don't do it the other way around!

Liberals love to tell people what to do. And in many cases they feel exempt from the rules they establish. And for those liberals, the ones in power, they are using their belief system to impose. The hypocrisy proves that its about power over others. It proves there is an unspoken two tier system "us and them". That is elitism. That is autocratic. And that, is what was the crucible for the birth of America, which was a rebellion against injustice.

Do as we say, not as we do is inherently unjust. So how can anyone who wants fairness and justice seriously consider voting Democrats?