Sunday, February 07, 2010


In Friday's Washington Post, Charles Krauthammer explains that Democrats view democracy:
through a prism of two cherished axioms: (1) The people are stupid and (2) Republicans are bad. Result? The dim, led by the malicious, vote incorrectly.

Liberal expressions of disdain for the intelligence and emotional maturity of the electorate have been, post-Massachusetts, remarkably unguarded. New York Times columnist Charles Blow chided Obama for not understanding the necessity of speaking "in the plain words of plain folks," because the people are "suspicious of complexity." Counseled Blow: "The next time he gives a speech, someone should tap him on the ankle and say, 'Mr. President, we're down here.' "

A Time magazine blogger was even more blunt about the ankle-dwelling mob, explaining that we are "a nation of dodos" that is "too dumb to thrive."

Obama joined the parade in the State of the Union address when, with supercilious modesty, he chided himself "for not explaining it [health care] more clearly to the American people." The subject, he noted, was "complex." The subject, it might also be noted, was one to which the master of complexity had devoted 29 speeches. Perhaps he did not speak slowly enough.

Then there are the emotional deficiencies of the masses. Nearly every Democratic apologist lamented the people's anger and anxiety, a free-floating agitation that prevented them from appreciating the beneficence of the social agenda the Democrats are so determined to foist upon them.

That brings us to Part 2 of the liberal conceit: Liberals act in the public interest, while conservatives think only of power, elections, self-aggrandizement and self-interest.

It is an old liberal theme that conservative ideas, being red in tooth and claw, cannot possibly emerge from any notion of the public good. A 2002 New York Times obituary for philosopher Robert Nozick explained that the strongly libertarian implications of Nozick's masterwork, "Anarchy, State, and Utopia," "proved comforting to the right, which was grateful for what it embraced as philosophical justification." The right, you see, is grateful when a bright intellectual can graft some philosophical rationalization onto its thoroughly base and self-regarding politics.

This belief in the moral hollowness of conservatism animates the current liberal mantra that Republican opposition to Obama's social democratic agenda -- which couldn't get through even a Democratic Congress and powered major Democratic losses in New Jersey, Virginia and Massachusetts -- is nothing but blind and cynical obstructionism.

By contrast, Democratic opposition to George W. Bush -- from Iraq to Social Security reform -- constituted dissent. And dissent, we were told at the time, including by candidate Obama, is "one of the truest expressions of patriotism."

No more. Today, dissent from the governing orthodoxy is nihilistic malice.
(via reader Josh A.)


Marc said...

The son of Ted Kennedy, Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D., R.I.), called Scott Brown's victory a joke.

"Brown's whole candidacy was shown to be a joke today when he was sworn in early in order to cast his first vote as an objection to Obama's appointment to the NLRB," Kennedy said Thursday.

Kennedy was referencing some Democrats' thoughts that Brown tried to bump up his swearing-in in order to give Republicans 41 votes, enough to filibuster the nomination of Craig Becker, a controversial nominee to join the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

"Seven out of ten of Brown's voters were labor households and he stressed that he was independent and while he was originally scheduled to be sworn in next week, they moved it up to today so he could cast his first vote, the most anti-labor, the most anti-what his constituents thought they were voting for when they voted for him," Kennedy said.

Brown, for his part, has denied trying to move up his nomination to block Becker's nomination.

"This is where he shows that when they need him, he's in the tank for the Republicans," Kennedy said.

OBloodyHell said...

> the most anti-what his constituents thought they were voting for when they voted for him," Kennedy said.

Wait, I thought the Kennedys were related to Aquaman, not Saturn Girl...

Of course, JFK junior, unlike his father, apparently couldn't swim, so maybe this generation DOES have mind reading powers...


OBloodyHell said...

By the way, this explains their desperate concern for global warming. With no ability to swim, they saw Waterworld, and went "Oh, my GOD!?!?"