Friday, May 6, 2011

Liberalism is so yesterday

Facebook postings over the last several years have been revelatory:  whenever there is a political post, the comment threads degenerate into name calling by so-called liberals.  The most common themes:  conservatives are racist, greedy and stupid.  In the last couple of days, for example, one post said "red state" people are racist.  Another post said that people who voted for President Bush are stupid.   I have repeatedly pleaded with Facebook friends to talk about policy, but to no avail.  The conclusion:  liberals' philosophy is so old and tired, that adherents cannot cogently talk about issues but must attack opponents personally.  It is a symptom of a sclerotic, dying political philosophy.  Liberalism's demise has been accelerated by the fact that it is the philosophy of the Establishment, and Establishment folks only talk to each other, reinforcing their views and not condoning dissent.

I was reminded of the racism charge last night when I listened to the Republican debate in South Carolina.  Fox News had Frank Luntz, a pollster, set up a focus group to listen to the debate.  The group consisted of  white South Carolina Republicans.  After the debate, the vast majority of the people in the group said that they were most impressed by Herman Cain, the former Godfather's Pizza CEO, and would vote for him for President.  Cain won the debate hands down.  Only one person supported Cain before the debate.  But Cain's performance was so impressive that the voters were swayed in his favor.

 Cain is a black man--not half white, like our President,  if one wants to note such silly and irrelevant distinctions. 

There was not one mention of race;  the voters talked about Cain's candor, straight forward answers, and his experience.  For white South Carolina Republicans, race was not a factor, as it seems to be in old hat liberal circles.

Here is my prediction:  unfortunately, the Left will now go after Herman Cain, like they did Clarence Thomas, Condi Rice and Colin Powell.   To the Left, these people are members of  a "victim" class who are supposed to think in lockstep with liberals-- a genuine racist view.

So, to my liberal friends:  stop the silly racism and stupidity charges.  They are so yesterday.  Lets assume that everyone of us has a good faith desire for what is best for America and American citizens--and that we are intelligent enough to grasp the issues.  Once we agree on these basic premises, we can discuss our divergent views on how to reach the same goal, and as Herman Cain said last night:  become "problem solvers".   


  1. Debbie - you'd do better not to use every written opportunity to score points for your political side. Racism is not the province of left or right; unfortunately, it can be found throughout the political spectrum. This is a stupid post - End of story.

  2. Dana: I am sorry I did not make myself clear: you are right, there are racists everywhere. The point I was trying to make was that the false racism charge has been used almost daily against the Right. It is used, in my opinion, to stop conversation about policy. How do you converse with someone who has just called you a racist? Here is the NYT today editorializing about racism yet again:
    " His administration took too long to find its footing on Egypt's transition and in Libya, but it was not because, as the popular conservative blog RedState said, he is a "trainee president."

    The blog accused Mr. Obama of basing his foreign policy on an "effete, pampered background" and a delight in consensus, and Republican presidential candidates quickly got the idea. Tim Pawlenty said in March that Mr. Obama was more worried about his international popularity than keeping the nation secure. And just a few weeks ago, Mitt Romney accused him of being timid, tentative, and apologetic, all qualities stemming from "his fundamental disbelief in American exceptionalism."

    One of the subtexts to this argument is that Mr. Obama is not a true American, a thread soaked in the politics of fear and racial intolerance that runs through so much of the anti-Obama right."

    So, according to the New York Times editorial page, because people criticized Obama for being timid in his foreign policy, the "subtext" (i.e. no evidence)is "racial intolerance that runs through so much of the anti-Obama right." That is a slander against me and millions of Americans who dare to criticize our President.