Are There ANY Sane Liberals Left?
[Guest Post by Lee Stranahan]
Here are three news stories. Tell me if any of these seem particularly partisan to you…
•A Congressman tells his constituents to keep quiet about billions in fraud.
•A planned violent attack during a political convention is thwarted.
•A college professor jovially boasts about electrocuting cats as a method of getting the upper hand in labor negotiations with an electric company.
To my mind, this is all basic stuff. Right and wrong, good and bad. Ethics 101. Who is in favor of fraud, sabotage and violence?
The unfortunate answer seems to be — most liberals today.
These are all news stories that were broken by people who didn’t assume they would be that controversial. I know, because I’m one of them. My story about Congressman Sanford Bishop covering up Pigford fraud was published on the front page of The Huffington Post. It ended up getting a total of seven (that’s 7) comments; something unheard of for a front-page story on HuffPost. There’s no question in my mind that if that story had had exactly the same facts but had been about a Republican – let’s say, Michele Bachmann — that it would’ve gotten thousands of comments.
Instead, my reporting the Pigford story has gotten me called a racist and a traitor.
The second story there relates to Brandon Darby, who helped stop violent attacks that were planned during the Republican convention in Minnesota. Whatever’s happened to me for reporting a story that really shouldn’t be controversial, it’s been 100 times worse for Brandon. The New York Times printed false information about Brandon and refused to retract until he sued them. Brandon has also been the target of a campaign labeling him as a “snitch.” This is all because Darby help stop violence.
The third story is about the class on unions being taught by two socialist/communist activists in Missouri. And those people who like to throw around the term "communist" loosely but one of the professors brags about being a member of the Communist Party and actually brings someone in from the Communist Party to recruit students as members, I think it’s a pretty fair assessment.
If you haven’t read about what’s going on in Missouri, I’m going to link to it again right here because the article written by student Philip Christofanelli is well worth your time. Based on my experience and what I’ve seen Brandon go through, my heart sank a little when I read this paragraph from Philip towards the end.
Both my grandfathers were proud union men, and I respect their hard work, which provided my parents and my family with a comfortable lifestyle today. I resent the fact that these professors’ irresponsible approach to this course has made legitimate union members appear ridiculous. I hold academic freedom as one of the most important tenets of our Constitutional Republic.
This saddened me because I know that Philip probably thinks that holding a fair and reasonable position will exempt him from being attacked. I know better and I feel sorry for what this young man is in for.
This is not a matter of being moderate or centrist. I think it’s going on here is the idea that somehow the ends justify the means. It’s the nagging feeling some liberals have that somehow, somewhere some conservatives might actually be right about something.
This is stupid. This is no other way to put it. It’s stupid. Take a look at the comments over here on Rock Story about Andrew Breitbart’s recent dustup with Al Pires about the Pigford scandal. You’ll see one or two people express momentary confusion that Breitbart seems to be making a valid point. Here’s an example; a comment named Bodoblock says…
Through all this shouting and name calling…can someone explain to me what all this is about again? My general lack of knowledge on this subject makes Breitbart look like he’s saying something worthwhile. Pires unfortunately does not argue well here. He resorts to name calling and seems elusive. Breitbart appears the better man in this (whether he actually is or not).
But just as quickly as a scintilla of rational thought starts to dawn in someone’s head, the liberal mob stamps it down. Is their argument based on facts? Rational deduction? Nope. They just don’t like Breitbart because they’ve been told by the left for about a year now how bad Andrew Breitbart is. A couple of examples…
Why does the media give this racist hog any respect or attention?
Somewhere out there is a photo of this man in his Klan costume. Some day soon it will reappear and he will be silenced. Again.
How can a serious journalist have Andrew Breitbart on his show? Breitbart has become synonymous with a malicious, slanderous attack on working class people through the use of doctored video.
Blah blah blah. Nobody dealing with the facts. It’s intellectual bankruptcy of the highest order and its common. It’s routine.
Liberalism is dead if liberals aren’t able to hold coherent, common sense positions.
- Lee Stranahan
........
They are acting this way because they are terrified their world view is being exposed as useless against enemies abroad and domestic problems. They are barely holding onto reality and they know it …
Comment by Jeff — 5/10/2011 @ 4:19 am
......
Short answer: yes. There are sane liberals. One only finds liberals on the Republican side of the aisle. The people you’re writing about are Progressive. One of the tenets of progressivism is the re-shaping of morals. Getting rid of the 10 Commandments (the Commandments being central to so many religions and other exercises of faith) has been a great victory.
................
Lee,
First of all, thank you for another fine commentary.
I live in a very liberal part of the world and this sort of weird political insanity is now affecting some of my best friends, who are middle-aged, upper-middle-class, technical and professional people. They are not your typical fringe leftists. Seething, long-winded rants about the Koch Brothers, Glenn Beck and, even after all this time, George Bush have entered what was once polite conversation. Daring to contradict any of the hysterical “arguments” brings shouting or worse. My “anarchist,” Noam Chomsky-adoring nephew seems far more calm and rational.
Recently I’ve been told by a number of friends that my views are “dangerous.” Over the years I’ve heard a lot of different criticisms of my semi-libertarian politics, but never before has the word “dangerous” been uttered. What in the world could possibly be “dangerous” about a world view that has “leave me alone” as its main tenet? Has the Daily Kos been pushing the word “dangerous?” I don’t like this at all.
Yours truly,
patterico.com |
