Anita Dunn, the White House Communications Director, described Mao Zedong in a June commencement address as one of her favorite political philosophers. Mao oversaw the death of as many as 70 million Chinese citizens. He is a mass murderer without equal in the history of the world. He was also a forceful advocate of the public option in medicine.
Conservatives criticize state-centered political philosophies like Mao’s because of their record of murdering their own citizens. Yet Ms. Dunn faced no consequences for her devotion to Mao. If her favorite political philosopher had been Charles Manson, she would have and should have been fired immediately. Why do liberals understand that Charles Manson is an unacceptable guide, but they tolerate a murderer like Mao?
It’s likely liberals dismiss or ignore the mass murder associated with their most important historical figures — Mao and Stalin – because their economic policies are so similar. A single-payer health care system, for example, which many liberals argue in favor of today, is a form of socialized medicine. Mao and Stalin both led socialist economies.
The vanity of liberals has a greater power over their personality than the inconvenient murder of a fellow human being. It doesn’t matter if it’s one dead or millions dead. The dead have no importance. If a liberal’s political philosophy engineered the crime, as Mao’s did, then the goal of the political philosophy is more important than the life of an individual.
If you deny murder and embrace a murderer, will you embrace dishonesty because you know your philosophy is superior?
The public option in medicine, for example, has been pursued with radical dishonesty in our current debate. Liberals claim to have no plan for a single-payer system as they pursue the public option, but further reading proves the public option is the means to reach a single-payer or a fully socialized system.
Liberals argue in favor of government-backed competition in health care in order to attain their goal of ending competition. Besides being as dumb as dumb can be based upon everything we know about economics, this is an advanced deception. Liberals have proven themselves ruthless liars in the medical reform debate, just as Anita Dunn is ruthlessly committed to a mass murderer.
If you embrace a murderer, you have lost all sense of right and wrong. Who is left here on earth to speak for the dead? It isn’t Anita Dunn. It isn’t the Democrats.
How can you explain acceptance of this kind of thinking? The best place to start is by ignoring reason and then dismissing our most basic obligations to our fellow man.