Opinion Forum

Telling It Like It Is

February 11th, 2010

I make no secret of the fact that my political views are conservative. I’m a Republican because it’s the party that best aligns with what I hold as my political philosophy. I am by no means completely satisfied with the Republicans, but for the present it is my only choice.

Like a lot of Americans, most of my life has been occupied with caring for and supporting my family. Politics was a subject that seldom came up at our table. That all changed in 1968 when anti-war radicals rioted in the streets of Chicago during the Democratic National Convention. The thought of these radicals gaining a foothold in our political system was to much for me to just ignore. So began my conversion to the opposite mindset.

Even with a first-hand look at what the left intended, many people continued as if nothing was changing. The Weather Underground, the SDS, and the Black Panthers became influential in our national politics because they had pretty much taken over the Democratic party. The party then became a hotbed of anti-American radicals, leftists, progressives, and elitists. In the election of 2008 this radical element succeeded in getting one of their own elected to the highest office in our nation.

Although these pro-communist organizations eventually broke up, many of their members remained politically active. Many of them became teachers and mentors to up-and-coming radical liberals.

The election of Barack Obama should have been a great victory for the far left, but it has proven otherwise. I am, of course, extremely happy to see the Democrats in such a mess. They’ve taken a golden opportunity and created a near total disaster. The bad news is that we are all going to suffer for many years thanks to the mistakes and bad judgement of this Administration and the current Congress. Because we are all victims of their actions, many of us are speaking out in opposition. Voter mistrust of both parties is very high. The up-coming mid-term elections will probably see Republicans gain seats in both houses. But would they do any better?

The absolute best appraisal and critique of liberals and elitists I have seen was published in the Washington Post on February 7. The author, Gerard Alexander, is an associate professor of politics at the University of Virginia. His article “Why are liberals so condescending?” goes into more depth and detail than I have seen in a very long time.

Mr. Alexander’s work is a must-read for conservatives and liberals alike. I was so impressed that I printed a copy for future reference. He hits the nail squarely on the head on every issue. Liberals and elitists had better re-evaluate how they view conservatives in this country. We are far more plentiful than they suspect.

Articles written by Larry Ennis
Tags: condescension, Democrats, elitists, liberals, radicals, Republicans
Categories: Politics | Comments (6) | Home

6 Responses to “Telling It Like It Is”

Tom | February 11th, 2010 at 6:24 pm

You’ve taken a grain of truth — the disturbing rise of violent radical groups in the 70s — and used it to condemn the entire Democratic Party, even up to the present day. And to make it even worse, you link those groups to the election of Barack Obama. That’s extremist nonsense.

The same logic — or lack of logic — could be used against Republicans and conservatives. Would it be right to say that the KKK, right-wing terrorists like abortion clinic bombers and Timothy McVeigh, and religious extremists like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell characterize the Republican Party and conservatives? Of course not; that would also be nonsense.

The biggest problem in our politics today is the highly negative influence of extremists on both sides who aren’t capable of addressing the arguments of the other side without going off the deep end.

Brianna | February 11th, 2010 at 9:59 pm

Larry – the article is excellent; thanks for pointing it out.

larry | February 13th, 2010 at 9:07 am

Extremist?
Can it be that political philosophy like beauty is all in the eye of the beholder?
People that oppose this administration and its radical agenda are extremist?
The invoking of the KKK, Adolf Hitler, Falwell and Roberson is only an attempt to camouflage what the left will do to institute their idea of “Change”.
Extremist, oh really?

Tom | February 13th, 2010 at 11:30 am

Well, it’s true that most everything is relative, I suppose. However, saying (among other things) that “this radical element” (referring to the likes of the Weather Underground, the SDS, and the Black Panthers) characterizes the Democratic Party and succeeded in getting Barack Obama elected is pretty extreme by any objective measure.

It’s also extremist to say, or imply, that Democrats and liberals are anti-American. A few may be, just like some Republicans and conservatives are pretty unsavory characters. You and those who think like you don’t have a monopoly on patriotism and love of country. If you think you do, that’s the first sign of extremism.

By the way, I read Alexander’s article when it was first published, and I also liked it. I could write a similar article about conservatives, of course, and it would be equally accurate.

Brianna | February 13th, 2010 at 12:44 pm

“I could write a similar article about conservatives, of course, and it would be equally accurate.”

I don’t think you could Tom. Or at least, not as strong of a one. Most prominent conservatives have historically been willing to credit their ideological opponents with good intentions, if not good results; that is not what is happening with the modern Left today. As for the conservatives… it’s really hard to reconcile the idea of maximum individual freedom with the idea that those same individuals are stupid and need to be controlled for their own good.

Tom | February 13th, 2010 at 2:47 pm

Brianna, what really concerns me is not the validity of the arguments of left and right but the extremist nature of many of the arguments. I don’t doubt that I, or you, or any other literate, well-informed person could write a defense of any point of view on virtually any issue. It can be done persuasively without resorting to calling those who make the opposite arguments socialists or fascists or communists or nazis or racists. It’s neither necessary nor accurate to accuse those who think differently of having evil motives such as secret agendas to destroy the country. You don’t do that in your arguments, and you shouldn’t accept it from others.

It’s one thing to be partisan in political terms — we all are, to one extent or another. It’s something else entirely to be a paranoid extremist. Soaking up the rants of extremists like Glenn Beck and Michael Savage or Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews (to name just a few) without filtering them with common sense and healthy skepticism leads to just that.

I’ve spent a bit of time talking and working directly with politicians of both parties — including folks like Barry Goldwater, Howard Baker, Dick Cheney, Sam Nunn, Carl Levin, Henry Hyde, Lloyd Bentsen, Colin Powell (my former boss), and others less well-known. I even had a few drinks at a party one night with Charlie Wilson, a thoroughly delightful man. I say this not to drop names but to make a point — not once, ever, did I hear any politician, regardless of party, indicate that his motives were anything other than patriotic or his intentions anything other than to advance the cause of his country. They may disagree with each other, often intensely, but they do so within the limits of civility and with at least a minimum degree of respect.

A political argument, however passionately made, is always much more effective when made with respect for the other side and without resort to ad hominem attacks and absurd exaggerations. Those are basic principles of the art of debate, which all of us should have studied at some point during our educations.