I get all kinds of invitations to speak.  I am flattered by all of them.  I figure that if folks are interested in more personal interaction after hearing me do three hours of radio, five days a week, then I owe them my best. 

I am not always able to accommodate each request, but I try. 

Yesterday, was another of those opportunities.  For reasons that will be perfectly clear, my appearance at one such gathering will be outlined here without naming the group.  The reason?  The organization is made up of good folks who do good things for the community and I do not wish to harm those efforts.

I was invited to offer my perspective on the recent elections.  Obviously, my views are well known, but these kind of gatherings offer a chance at some civil discourse - which I love.  However, I turned things a bit by asking them a question.

"What does fairness mean?" 

Some folks peppered the room with ideas, others offered their answers more like a a bunch of jalapenos.  No subtlety there.  One man in particular offered a clouded, typical liberal response and the moment he opened his mouth I knew I had made the right choice in not giving "a talk".  For some of the liberals in the room that would have been too much to bear.  You see, liberals are not capable in engaging in civil discourse.  It always, repeat always, because a tension filled, anger-fest and yesterday was the perfect example of it. 

As I framed the discussion in tax policy - the some of the liberals in the room could not fathom that tax cuts lead to increased revenue.  Despite evidence that abounds to the contrary, most liberals are incapable of being wrong or taking responsibility.  Conservatives are compelled by their convictions and moral compass to do so, but not liberals. 

I explained to one man, who was particularly rude (but, he can't help it, he's a liberal, so it comes naturally), that I was invited to be there, that I was a guest and I would be perfectly content to walk out of the room because I did not come there to enter into brouhaha. 

In listening to one man in particular who seemed offended to the bone that the sons of Sam Walton inherited some of their dad's wealth.  You see, this man defines fairness as ability to pay, but more importantly he seemed to think that Walton's kids did not deserve their inheritance.  That it was "unfair".  When I asked what his point really was; was he suggesting that it belongs to the government; there was silence. 

You see I think that's one of the blessings that come with hard work, a great idea, etc.  You and YOUR FAMILY enjoy the blessings of it.  Liberals detest success...especially the success of others.

Then an epiphany.  When it comes right down to it - most liberals require government to force them to do what their conscience is not able to provoke them to do.  That's why they, almost universally, require big government because they lack the personal discipline to do the right (sorry) thing.  They need government to reach into their lives and make them do it.  Hence the redistribution of wealth - which is what "fairness" is all about; taking from those that have and giving it to those who do not - regardless of reason.  Why?  Because it's the "fair" thing to do.

Yesterday was a lesson in uncivil discourse.  I learned something.  I might have been the only one who did.