Campaign for America's Future, a liberal blog, has an interesting article up that outlines what the author holds to be ten myths that conservatives believe about progressives. Are they really myths?
1. Liberals hate America. Yes, this is mostly a myth. There is a segment of the left that is virulently anti-American, but it is a minority. Calling all liberals anti-American is just a smear.
2. Liberals want to leave us defenseless. This is a myth because of the emphasis on what liberals want. It is true that liberals often advocate policies that conservatives think would weaken the U.S. But like conservatives, most liberals believe their policy positions are best for the nation.
3. Liberals hate the free market. Whether or not this is a myth depends on your definition of the free market. If you think government regulation of every facet of the economy, public & private partnerships, massive government spending on stimulus & bailouts, blind support for unions, higher taxes on investors & the most productive elements of the economy, and support for every socialistic program short of outright socialism is love for the free market, then liberals love the free market. Otherwise, not so much. This is not a myth, at worst it's an oversimplification.
4. Liberals hate our troops. Like point #1, this is definitely a myth except for a small minority of the left that really does hate America & the troops.
5. Liberals are a bunch of elitists who hate decent working- and middle-class Americans. Many liberals are indeed elitists -- as are many conservatives. But whether elitist or not, I do not believe they hate working and middle-class Americans.
6. Liberals are against "family values." As with the free market, this depends on your definition of family values. I'm ok with calling it a myth.
7. Liberals want to raise our taxes. I'm sorry, but this is most definitely not a myth. Liberals certainly do want to raise taxes, and most do not appear to understand simple economics, such as the fact that higher taxes on businesses result in higher cost to consumers -- in effect raising taxes on the consumers.
8. Liberals are Godless—and therefore, amoral. Obviously a myth. Belief in gods is not a requirement for morality, and many liberals are believers anyway.
9. Liberals don't believe in personal responsibility. This is a myth only if asserted that starkly. I don't think it's a myth that many liberals tend believe less in personal responsibility than conservatives.
10. Liberals are wimps. This is myth as a blanket statement. Whether or not it is true depends entirely on the context in which it is used. When applied to liberal positions on foreign policy and some other issues, it can contain an element of truth.
This is impressively even-handed, but I don't think you're the kind of conservative the article was aimed at (i.e. you're more of a McCain conservative than a Palin conservative - that's 2000 McCain, of course, not 2008, post-soul-mortgaging McCain). The points you disagree on seem to mostly be the ones the author herself noted were very subjective. Wouldn't it be great if everyone could constructively disagree in this fashion, rather than both sides just shouting past one another?
ReplyDeleteSigh.
You should read some of Sara Robinson's co-blogger's hate-filled attacks on George Bush (yes, Sara Robinson also writes for the Group News Blog, one of the farthest-left deepest-draught cesspools out there, comparable to KOS and DU) before you decide to 'play nice'.
ReplyDeleteIt's a fact that leftism is, if it is carried as far left as the current crop of Howard Dean/Pelosi/Reid/Obama sorts would take it, anathema to the America we've seen for the past couple hundred years. That's whether or not you are irreligious or of faith; no matter if you support Sarah Palin or John McCain.
I don't trust Obama. At best, he's an immature childe with a messiah complex. At worst, he might be America's last president.
I'm hoping for the best.
Serr8d -
ReplyDeleteI understand - when liberal bloggers express their negative opinion of Bush, it's a hate-filled attack, but when people like you express your negative opinion of Obama, you're just a concerned citizen. Gotcha.
This kind of talk, on either side, is lethal to democratic debate. As a liberal, for the last eight years I have often been ashamed by the childish attitude of people I technically agree with. I can't stand Bush, but making posters which compare him to Hitler, for example, is just pathetic. It should be possible to profoundly oppose what a politician stands for without resorting to that kind of discourse. Equally, you're free to condemn Obama as much as you like, but "might be America's last president"? Give me a break. Firstly, the left are part of the American political establishment, and Americans just elected a liberal president by a far more substantial margin than Bush ever got (Obama even went the novel route of actually getting more votes than his opponent, unlike Bush in 2000). To claim that only conservatism can claim to represent "real America" is just the kind of small-minded hysteria that just lost you an election ("the pro-America parts of this great nation", remember?). Secondly, thanks to a combination of checks and balances and bureaucracy, the power of any single administration to push the country too far in one direction is limited. Bush had a majority in both houses for most of his time in office, but the country failed to turn into the far-right theocracy the most paranoid members of the left would have predicted. Put simply, the POTUS is at the helm of a supertanker - they can steer the broad direction of the ship for a time, but the idea they can manouever however they please in just eight years maximum is simply deluded. The most powerful person in the world, yes, but not God.
Anyway, all this is just a very long-winded way of saying that you really need to calm down. You're in for at least four years (probably eight) of living with a president you disagree with on most issues, but at some point the pendulum will swing back in your direction and the rest of us will be back to our state of quiet despair, and so on ad infinitum. When Winston Churchill lost the 1945 UK General election (to a party that really was socialist, unlike the Democrats), did he start making dark predictions about the death of Western civilization? No. He said (I'm paraphrasing slightly) "This is democracy - this is what we fought for".
So grow a pair, already - you lost, and you lost big. The message to the right should be: start looking to the future, or die.
"Negative opinion of Bush". Gotcha.
ReplyDeleteMention race, you didn't, but I'll remind you: race played more of a role in Obama’s election that it did in his defeat. Remember, 98 to 99% of blacks voted for BHO solely because he was black. That’s racism. And I’ll bet many guilty-conscience lib’ruls did the same.
People who voted against Obama in droves did so because many people still generally hate the liberal's progressive lifestyles: their embrace of homo-metrosexuality; the left’s desire for gun control; there’s deep worry that the liberal’s win will serve to weaken our armed forces (remember, “Ah loathe the military” is much shared not only by Clinton but by many other leftists); we know that leftists embrace atheism and abortion. So it doesn’t surprise that so many (and don’t forget: 48% of all the voters: over 59,000,000 people everywhere voted against Obama, and that’s not a small number) are not happy with Obama’s far-left leanings, and realize that he has an under reported (but easily proven) desire to drive America to socialism.
So, you of the wide grin, remember that Obonga is not a king or a messiah (sorry to disappoint you), he’s just a man, a young, inexperienced man (who has chosen Clinton Castaways (CHANGE!) to lead him out of the wilderness) and who has 4 years to push leftist, progressive agendas. That might be enough to awaken the people to his failings.
And also remember that your (and your ilk’s) 8 years of BDS is hanging over his head. And payback is a dish best served cold.
Serr8d.
ReplyDeleteMy post was a response only to that one article, which I found reasonable and worth commenting on, not to everything on the site. As I'm sure you do, I find much of the stuff on left-wing blogs irrational nonsense.
I put liberals into two main categories, those that I can argue with in a civil fashion, and those that are in their own little left-wing world. Tomos hasn't said anything that indicates he's in the latter category.
Also, there are very few blogs where liberals & conservatives can actually discuss things. On most, any back & forth consists of insults & talking points, with the outnumbered faction being shouted down (or banned entirely). I'd rather not have that here.
As for Obama. I'm not looking forward to the Obama administration. I'm against pretty much every one of his policy proposals. But I don't see the point in just bashing him in general, before he's even done anything. The election is over, and unfortunately we lost.
Let's look again at Tomos' original reply to your post:
ReplyDeleteThis is impressively even-handed... Surprise, surprise! A semi-intelligent rethuglican!
..you're more of a McCain conservative than a Palin conservative - that's 2000 McCain, of course, not 2008, post-soul-mortgaging McCain.. Tomos realizes you aren't one of those ignorant Republican voters who actually liked Sarah Palin; those who did are obviously far to the left side of the bell curve! And, Tomas adds a nice slash at John McCain who, remember, was loved by the left and their NYT/LAT press corps, until he became the GOP nominee. John McCain was a poor choice for the GOP, right from the start.
The fact remains, UNRR, that the ideological differences between Conservatives and Leftists are settled in their minds by Conservatives who must move farther to the left, not by any movement by the left towards Conservatives.
It's fine that the Kathleen Parkers and other country-club Republicans can bash Sarah Palin and wonder if Trig is human or not, and you can join with them if you like. But remember, there is a deep divide between Conservatives and the leftists, especially now with Obama in office. George Bush was much closer to center than Obama is, and we'll see how that plays out. Obama has some very large shoes to fill: George Bush prevented any further attacks on our country during his watch. The watch starts afresh January 20th.
I'll watch every move Obama makes, and I for one won't hesitate to give back that what George Bush received since November of 2000..unrequited hate.
Those sorts of things just won't go away, you know.
Serr8d -
ReplyDeleteI only actually posted on here in the first place in response to the blog post, which really did seem pretty reasonable to me. I don't think all conservatives are idiots, I just happen to think you're losing on certain issues. Terri Schiavo, after many years of political grandstanding on both sides, is allowed to die quietly in 2005, and do the American people rise up and march on Washington to express their outrage? Did voters vote the nasty life-hating liberals tight out of congress in 2006? No. No one even talks about it any more. Proposition 8 passed, but by 52 to 48, a huge jump from California anti-gay rights legislation in 2000 that passed 61 to 38. You're right, I didn't bring race up, why did you? Perhaps because it's a nice, convenient excuse for why your side lost this year, without actually having to think about the message you gave the American people. Sadly, the numbers just don't work. What you fail to mention is that black voters have overwhelmingly broken for the Democrat for a long time - about 88% for Kerry, for instance. While the jump into the high 90s for Obama is notable, and can maybe be attributed partly to his race (though I'm sure Hurricane Katrina played its part), that's just not a big enough move to swing a general election. As for guilty liberals, the right contradicts itself. On the one hand such people are a tiny elite, on the other their decision to vote for affirmative action can put a man in the White House. Finally, your point about 48% voting against Obama is just desperate. I bet you anything a liberal saying something similar about the 2004 elections would have been laughed off any right-wing forum, and rightly so. The whole reason we have the electoral college is that the popular vote, which rarely breaks more decisively than 45-55, can translate into an unambiguous majority for one candidate. Obama won, and won legitimately. He's going to be everyone's president, not just the 52.7% who voted for him - that's not empty campaign rhetoric, just saying that in real terms, he has power over all Americans now. For the record, most liberals hold Bush in such contempt because of things he actually did while president. Conservatives seem to have decided Obama is untrustworthy and unfit for the position before he's served a day. That's your democratic right, of course.
As a liberal, seeing posts like yours actually puts a smile on my face, because the more time you people spend bitterly looking to the past and sniping at Obama, the more time you'll be out of power.
UNRR - I daresay you feel this way too, and just as you've met a lot of people trapped in their own little left-wing world, I seem to keep meeting people like Serr8d, trapped in their own little right-wing world, unwilling to take any responsibility for their own failures as a movement (ironic, as conservatism is supposedly all about personal responsibility). Here's a piece by a conservative (and no, not a RINO, he's quite a way to the right on many issues) I respect a lot, even when I disagree with him, analysing the election result:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/791jsebl.asp
I wrote "impressively even-handed" in my original response not, as Serr8d seems to think, to patronise you but because it was genuinely nice to find a rebuttal to the original article that wasn't just venom. I am so deeply tired of the level of debate on all sides that I just wanted to say thanks. I didn't expect to end up posting essays like this, but that's comment threads for you, they have a power to bring out the loudmouth in all of us.
Of course, in some cases he needs less bringing out than in others...
Tomos,
ReplyDeleteI largely agree with what you wrote, and I've read that P.J. O'Rourke article -- it's a good one.
Serr8d,
"It's fine that the Kathleen Parkers and other country-club Republicans can bash Sarah Palin and wonder if Trig is human or not, and you can join with them if you like."
Those are two different things. There's a huge difference between criticizing Palin on her merits as the nominee, or as a potential presidential candidate, and coming up with crazy conspiracy theories or attacking her family. There's no reason Palin should somehow be off limits to reasonable criticism from Republicans. I had a post up about what I thought of Parker's "God" article. (I'm not impressed with Parker and her attitude).
"I for one won't hesitate to give back that what George Bush received since November of 2000..unrequited hate."
I have no desire to act like the leftists who's behavior I've condemned with regard to Bush. I'll criticize Obama whenever he does something I think is wrong, but we've had enough BDS over the last eight years. There's no reason to replace it with ODS.
I have no desire to act like the leftists who's behavior I've condemned with regard to Bush. I'll criticize Obama whenever he does something I think is wrong, but we've had enough BDS over the last eight years. There's no reason to replace it with ODS.
ReplyDeletePolitics is not about civility, or respect, or fair dealing; partisan politics is all about the seizing and utilization of power. The other side spent 8 years clawing and scratching and, yes, beating up on a 'compassionate' conservative who really shouldn't have been elected in the first place. George Bush was not forceful enough in his dealings with Congress, with the leftists. He allowed too many conservative values to become diminished. If it weren't for the opposition's face (Kerry) I might have voted against Bush in 2004.
I live in Tennessee. I voted for Jimmy Carter in my first presidential election; I voted for Al Gore twice for U.S. Senator. I watched Al Gore go from opposing abortion and gun control, to supporting both. I was one of many 'boots on the ground, the NRA, to help defeat Al Gore in Tennessee in 2000, and I'm proud of that. I'm also proud that Tennessee bucked the national trend this year and booted Democrats from the State House for the first time since the Civil War. We, here, are still a Red State, and solidly connected to our roots and Conservatism.
And I will oppose, strongly, every leftist principle that BHO seeks to implement. I will oppose RINOs, and the Kathleen Parkers who are seeking to move leftward. O'Rourke is right in that Bush wasn't strong enough; read carefully and you'll see an old man who is near to giving up. Not so for me. My principles are not for CHANGE.
Get it right: it's not ODS, it's BHODS.
"Politics is not about civility, or respect, or fair dealing; partisan politics is all about the seizing and utilization of power"
ReplyDeleteIt's also about forming alliances with people, some of whom don't agree with you on every issue. And I'm not a politician, and have no desire to act like one.
"George Bush was not forceful enough in his dealings with Congress, with the leftists. He allowed too many conservative values to become diminished."
True.
"And I will oppose, strongly, every leftist principle that BHO seeks to implement"
I'm with you on that.
"I will oppose RINOs, and the Kathleen Parkers who are seeking to move leftward. "
I don't want to move the GOP leftward, but I oppose trying to run people out of the party because they disagree on certain issues. That goes for moderates who want to kick out religious or social conservatives, and for social conservatives who want to expel moderates.