Colonel Nicholson and Progressive Liberals

It is very difficult for me to understand the logical end game of progressive liberal movement. Thinking about HillaryCare 2.0, you wonder how the state planning of health care in the US will end up any better then the state planning of agriculture in the Soviet Union. Trying to reconcile the moral hypocrisy of not allow ROTC on campus for its "discriminatory" position on gays (in quotes because it is the same policy for heterosexuals) while allowing someone who advocates the killing of gays for the sin of homosexuality to speak on campus is really hard.

In The Bridge on the River Kwai, Colonel Nicholson seeks to show his captors the superiority of the British soldier and loses sight of his true purpose - defeating a fanatical enemy. In the end, responsible for the deaths of several of the commandos who seek to blow up his masterpiece, he comes to his senses: "What have I done?!" And, as his last act, falls on the plunger and destroys the train carrying Japanese soldiers. Major Clipton looks at the scene and simply says, "Madness."

The progressive movement has flourished because it has not had to take responsibility for its actions. Like a petulant child, it shrieks about injustice without regards to facts or context. It shrieks simply because it wants its way. Once it receives the lollipop in consolation, it is content.

Maybe there is freedom in knowing that this country is not nuts enough to give you real responsibility, but is it too much for us to ask that you occasionally - occasionally - act like an adult?