On August 17 in the Sarnia Observer, there was a letter to the editor from Michael Shoesmith entitled “Liberalism Creates Sense of Entitlement” as follows:
Sir:Regarding the Aug. 13 article concerning fines handed out to people for going through construction zones, it is evident to me that something needs to be done about this heinous tragedy. I am, of course, referring to the growing sense of personal entitlement people have in today's liberal climate.
My impression of the matter, as outlined in your article, is that the person proceeded into the construction zone, saw the officer and pretended to only be looking for directions from the officer. The reason I make this assessment is because if a person comes across an area which is off-limits, would that person not stop before entering the forbidden area and then proceed on foot to the law enforcement officer to ask for assistance or wave the officer over? That is the logical series of events that would transpire if the person was actually honest about it.
No, there is something more sinister going on in the minds of the masses these days. People are less and less aware of anything outside of a very small personal bubble. It's the mental disorder of liberalism.
Here's how the dictionary defines it: "a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary systems of government, nonviolent modification of political, social, or economic institutions to assure unrestricted development in all spheres of human endeavor and governmental guarantees of individual rights and civil liberties."
Allow me to focus your attention to the word "unrestricted." How dare that construction company restrict the movement of people? How dare that officer restrict my free ability to go to the salon?
Liberalism, in essence, is the belief that one set of rules applies to me and a completely different set of rules applies to everyone else. That, by any definition, is a mental disorder.
Liberals "feel" harassed when their philosophy is confronted with the aggressive use of force as is the way all productive, law-abiding societies thrive. We live in a world that is governed by the aggressive use of force and as Margaret Thatcher once said, "The facts of life are conservative."
The people who think they are entitled to go through a construction barrier are the same people who would be most likely to sue the construction company if they fell into a hole and damaged their vehicle.
The road closure at the intersection of Finch and Wellington has been an enormous burden to me and my family. I never cross it even though it would save me a several mile detour.
The old adage "rules were meant to be broken" does not and should not apply to grown-ups. Time to grow up, people -- Michael D. Shoesmith Sarnia
A few friends had forwarded this link to me but I didn’t feel any need to respond to his load of incredible stupid. However, someone else has written in to the paper with a response:
“Ignorance Displayed by Drivers ‘Symptoms of Human Nature’:
Sir: I am writing in regard to your Letter to the Editor of Aug. 17. Mr. Shoesmith feels that the creeping menace of Liberalism is to blame for the "heinous tragedy" of citizen illegally driving through the innumerable construction zones in this city.
He then proceeds to praise "aggressive use of force" and even resorts to a quote from conservative darling Maggy Thatcher. Only in a periodical published by Sun Media would such an ill-conceived rant see the light of day. We can blame Liberalism for universal health care, old-age pension, progressive taxation, and other institutions established to promote "unrestricted" human development. We can even blame Liberalism for the appearance of Mr. Shoesmith's laughable screed in print. The ignorance and selfishness displayed by a few wayward motorists are not tenets of liberal thought, they are symptoms of human nature.
Perhaps equating left-wing ideals with lawlessness and praising "aggressive use of force" (such as flying bombs into NYC?) are the true symptoms of "mental disorder."
-- Damien Neal Sarnia
Well said Damien, well said. Really, though, do you think that someone as dense as Michael Shoesmith can truly grasp the concept?