I try to understand liberals and how they come to their conclusions on various issues.  I recognize most are deceived and not willing to think through issues to the point where they can grasp the concepts of why we must fight and demolish radical Islamic terrorism.  Deception lingers even though liberalism has long been shown to be a bankrupt philosophy both morally and in the practical application of the system.  Because of people’s willingness to be deceived by the claims of liberalism, it will continue to be promulgated by the main stream media.        

But occasionally the self deception reaches a level that is breathtaking in its absurdity, and can only be described as idiotic in the depth of the lack of understanding it portrays.  Such is the case with a recent blog entry on Anderson Cooper’s blog site by CNN correspondent Tom Foreman. 

Foreman questioned how a news agency should define a terrorist: 

“What makes a terrorist?

I don't mean why do people starting bombing, and shooting and fighting from the shadows. I mean, for the purposes of news organizations defining terrorism, what should the definition be?

The United States and others clearly call Hezbollah a terrorist group: The source of countless raids, bombings and attacks on Israel; the bombing of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983, which left 241 people dead; and the architects of all those displays in which young men cover their faces, strap mock bombs to their chests, and parade before the cameras pledging to kill any and all soldiers and civilians alike who oppose their cause.

All this makes Hezbollah, especially for many westerners, the very definition of a terrorist group.

But some people describe another part of Hezbollah. They talk about a group that is beloved in southern Lebanon for running schools, hospitals, social services, even clearing snow in the winter for some communities that the official government of Lebanon does not serve. They say these things make Hezbollah something other than a terrorist group: A quasi-government; a nation within a nation.

All of this is done for Shiite Muslim families. The Shiites in Lebanon have long felt economically and politically deprived, and Hezbollah clearly gives many of them a feeling of both military and social strength.

So for one side, Hezbollah is a killing machine bent on seizing by terror what it wants from the world; for the other side, Hezbollah is a brave force, fighting for the rights of its people.

So what should the standard be? If you ran a newsroom, how would you define who is called a terrorist and who is not? What, for you, is Hezbollah?”

Foreman’s argument seems to be that news agencies might have difficulty determining whether or not Hezbollah is a terrorist group because they provide some helpful services for the Shiites in Lebanon.  Is this a valid way of determining whether or not a group qualifies as a terrorist organization? 

The answer for liberals is yes, and the reason they can answer yes harkens back to the moral fuzziness of liberal philosophy.  Evil does not exist for a liberal.  There is good and there is “falling short of your potential.”  Evil implies a moral standard of right and wrong.  And therein lays the rub.  If there is right and wrong, there are moral absolutes against which an individual, organization, or country, can be judged to determine the validity of their actions.  Evil people and organizations may do some good deeds but those deeds do not take priority over the framework of evil in which they are done.  Except for the liberal, who has no framework, but only moral relativism.  Of course, the whole concept of good and evil will eventually, and logically, lead back to (gasp) God.  A real no no for a liberal— except at election time. 

With no set standard to judge by, I guess news agencies, which are dominated by liberals, would have a tough time in classifying Hezbollah and groups of their ilk as evil or terrorist.  Gratefully, most people still acknowledge acts of beheading and terrorism as evil.  Unfortunately though, there are idiots among us.