I have come to the realization that Liberals, which include most Democrats, are criminally insane. This is a shocking conclusion, but one I've come to after careful deliberation. You may not believe that. So, let me explain why it's true.
The most widely accepted, and historically applied definition of "insanity" in the criminal law is the inability to distinguish between right and wrong. This is very different from the civil notion of insanity which is vaguely defined by the various pathologies recognized by the American Psychological Association. In the civil arena, there is no clear cut, single definition of insanity. It's all quite mysterious.
But the criminal courts require a sanity test that even lay jurors can understand. And so, criminal insanity is narrowly and simply defined. Let me share an illuminating example that was told to me many years ago. A psychopath kills a small child, and eats the body. If he sits down in the roadway where everyone can see him eat, he's criminally insane. However, if he carries the body to the side of the road, and sits down to eat behind some bushes, he's sane. He's sane because the act of hiding behind the bushes demonstrates that he understands the difference between right and wrong, and that what he is doing is wrong. Simple, huh?
As I see it, most liberals are eating the child in the middle of the road. In other words, they have no idea that what they are doing is wrong. They cannot distinguish between right and wrong. Please note that I am not saying that liberals are criminals, only that they are insane under criminal law standards. Not everything that is wrong is against the law.
I do not believe that most liberals are bad people. I doubt if they get up in the morning thinking "What evil can I do today." In fact, judged only by their intentions, most liberals seem like very decent people. Just look at their stated goals: to feed the hungry, heal the sick, educate the masses, eliminate discrimination, and provide higher living standards for everyone. Who can argue with all that? I approve of those goals. But, I cannot approve of their methods in trying to reach those goals.
Liberals tell lies to support their views. I need not cite individual examples because the practice is so wide spread and continuous that everyone knows about it. Liberals know about it. The point is, that liberals think it's OK because the lies are told in furtherance of achieving their lofty goals. They think it's OK to besmirch a conservative candidate's character with a scurrilous lie, because they need to defeat that candidate as a means toward achieving their ends. They think it's OK to lie about their own candidate's qualifications and character for the same reason.
Now, we all know that a lie is a lie, and that no amount of lipstick is going to turn that pig into the truth. And, we all know that lies and lying are wrong. Nevertheless, liberals sit in the middle of the road telling lies to whoever will listen. They feel good about it. In fact, they are proud of their lies, and congratulate each other for having told them. Once told, their lies are joyfully repeated as often as possible. Eventually, most of their lies are revealed as untrue by developing circumstances or conservative investigations. Then, that particular lie dies down. But rarely is a retraction or apology given. They simply go on to the next lie.
I want to reemphasize here that liberals think this is OK. My whole point is that they can't appreciate the difference between right and wrong. In their world, they are doing the right thing by doing something that is wrong. They are eating the child while sitting in the middle of the road.
And, it's not just lying that demonstrates their insanity. Just look at their basic social policies. They want the government to provide all kinds of benefits. That is how they want to achieve their lofty goals. And, to pay for those benefits, they want the government to forcibly take money away from wealthier citizens, and give it to poorer citizens. That's called redistribution of wealth. That's really just a euphemism for stealing. Of course, every citizen should pay his share for necessary services. For example, if five men crowd into a taxi for a trip to the airport, and the fair is $100.00, each man should pay $20.00. But what if three of the men pull out guns, and demand that the entire fair be paid by the remaining two on the grounds that they are wealthier, and can therefore afford to pay $50.00 each more comfortably than the three could afford to pay their $20.00? I think we can all agree that would be stealing, and that stealing is wrong. But, the way the liberals propose to fund their social programs is no different. A liberal would force a wealthier man to pay for benefits for a poorer man. The liberals sit in the middle of the road holding their guns on the wealthy. That's stealing. Obviously, they don't know right from wrong. It's insanity.
Now, I don't mean to say that there aren't crafty, disingenuous liberals who are intentionally spreading lies or stealing with malicious intent. Such individuals exist. When confronted, they usually fall back on some form of relativistic intellectualism such as "It depends on what the definition of "is" is." Or, "Well nothing is black and white, so it depends on the circumstances." That's merely evasive nonsense. Telling a lie or stealing is always wrong, and those individuals are not insane, but evil.
But, the majority of liberals are followers, not leaders, and they are blissfully unaware of the wrongful nature of their acts. Even some liberal leaders are so deluded as to truly believe they are doing right by doing wrong. Despite protestations to the contrary, their actions prove that they do not know the difference between right and wrong. They are criminally insane.