NPR

I listen to NPR to get a glimpse into the liberal mind.  I can't stand liberal talk radio or TV because they only deal in hyperbole and sanctimonious narcissism.  What I glean from the less radical mindset of the NPR progressive is that they deal in faulty reasoning as a method of deriving their point of view and then imposing it upon everyone else but themselves.

During an interview of Senate Majority Whip Dick Durban, he suggested that just because the pro-gun lobby was against more laws on the basis that the existing laws don't stop gun violence was, somehow, akin to advocating that just because people speed, in violation of existing speed limits, the speed limits should be eliminated. That is a faulty comparison.  What should have been the comparison is that the pro-gun lobby is against the progressive notion that by adding more speed signs between the existing signs and making them bigger or brighter is the solution to people speeding.

The interviewer Scott Simons brought up the pro-gun question, as if by doing so it legitimized the interview making it some how seemed balanced.  When in fact it served only as a spring board for Durban to make his faulty comparison. The was no critical evaluation by Scott or any follow up to remedy the faulty reasoning.

Solutions are not found by deceiving ourselves or pretending to treat the symptoms of the problem as the problem.  Gun violence is not the problem it is the symptom.  The problem needs to be clearly articulated before a solution can be honestly discussed.  Laws that prohibit symptoms are never going to be effective and more laws that refine the prohibitions are just as useless as the original laws.

It is understandable that the problem is very complex.  It is understandable that the solution is not going to be easy or quick.  It is not understandable why the liberal establishment assumes that their position to eradicate all guns is the best solution to a violent human nature which simply adopts the best means of killing another human or themselves.  It is not understandable why the progressive mentality is to consider people as not being able to govern themselves but that a faceless bureaucracy made of the people can be led with the support, supposedly, of the smartest and wisest people of the time which, fortunately for us stupid people, includes them.

What is not understandable is that the progressive, the liberal whatever they want to call themselves rejects the real solution which is for our society to subscribe to and live by a set of values and morals that have come about through the human endeavor, developed by trial and error, pain and suffering, and is a product of the best of humanity, the brightest of minds simply because it is labeled religious and mostly because it requires them to behave like a rational, compassionate, and selfless individuals.

The reason it became a religion is because that was perceived by our progenitors to be a reasonable way to communicate, gradually codify, eventually propagate addendum, educate the masses,  and extend the value of life's lessons beyond the individual's lifetime.  The development of religion offered the greatest hope that future generations would benefit from the personal sacrifices and tragedies suffered by the proceeding generations and endure through each.

It is unfortunate that the selfishness of few can destroy the hopes and dreams of the many because the selfish are not willing to accept the wisdom of the past. That the lust for power by the few can devastate the freedom that was available to all because the lustful are willing to sacrifice others for their gains.  It is unfortunate that the deceit of one leads to the ignorance of others, that a lie is so easy to tell and so hard to distinguish and refute, and that a willingness by too many to not question reason or rationale can lead to the downfall of a society.