Are Some Leftists So Mean Because it’s in their Nature?
Back in May, noting the absence of magnanimity about victorious Democrats, Amity Shlaes observed that in the past
. . . politicians and policy thinkers tended to be magnanimous in victory. They and their friends focused, post- victory, on policy and strategy — not on trashing individuals. . . .
Still, somehow, the magnanimity isn’t there. Indeed, the closer the Democrats get to total power, the nastier the commentators friendly to them have become.
Earlier today, wondering how Democrats who “own everything” can get away blaming “Republicans for anything” the folks at tehresistance alert us to a post over on Ace where Drew M. offers a similar observation:
Gee, why the sudden focus on a minority party with zero ability to actually block or even slow down the Democrats? Maybe it’s because his health care proposals are tanking with the public.
While that blogger believes the attacks are designed to divert attention from the shortcomings of the Democrats’ policies, I wonder if something else is at play. So many on the left, including the supposedly postpartisan President Obama ostensibly committed to a new kind of politics where everybody just stays “focused on doing the job instead of trying to figure out who you can pass blame on to,” just “need” to attack Republicans for their own psychological peace of mind and/or sense of self-righteous self-satisfaction.
Just like the scorpion, such venom is in their nature:
The story is simple. A scorpion asks a frog to carry him across the river. The frog is afraid of being stung. But the scorpion reassures the frog that, if stung, the frog would drown, and therefore so would the scorpion. The frog agrees. Halfway through, the scorpion stings the frog. They will both drown. The frog asks the scorpion, “why?” The scorpion says, “I’m a scorpion; it’s my nature.”
35 Comments
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Let’s see. Committed leftists want power. And to feel virtuous about wielding it. They want to control people. And to feel like they are wise rulers (Plato’s Republic) for doing so. They want to be “compassionate” with OPM (Other People’s Money).
And they don’t like having the contradictions in all that pointed out. (For example, having pointed out how profoundly un-compassionate it is to control people, to seize their money, etc.) And they can’t afford to have the contradictions pointed out, because a society where people can get away with ridiculing leftists is a society where their power is not at all secure.
So, you have people whose political ambitions (I won’t dignify them by calling them “ideals”) inherently drive them to control others and to shut down dissent by any and all means that they can get away with. Hmm, is that how a “naturally mean” person would act?
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 20, 2009 @ 7:32 pm - July 20, 2009
(continued) Or would a “naturally mean” person be more innocently selfish? (I.e., honest about the specific things they want; not seeking to wield power over others in general, or for power’s own sake) It is an interesting question.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 20, 2009 @ 7:34 pm - July 20, 2009
I think it’s more than the scorpion and the frog. ( as in, it’s the nature of the scorpion to sting no matter what).
Many Dems are getting scared, they do not want to lose their seats and many of their constituents are letting them know how angry they are.
The bogeyman of the Republicans has worked for a while, problem is, Americans are smarter than that.
Comment by Leah — July 20, 2009 @ 7:54 pm - July 20, 2009
The biggest misconception about the libtard left is that they are “compassionate,” “open-minded” and “looking out for the little guy.”
Yet as a conservative who happens to be gay, I find that scenario to be the least plausible. They are the biggest egomaniacs and power-seekers I have ever seen in my life.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — July 20, 2009 @ 7:57 pm - July 20, 2009
Let’s hope. They weren’t in 2008. But let’s hope Americans can still see through a brick wall in time.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 20, 2009 @ 8:05 pm - July 20, 2009
Does Amity Shlaes know anything of our elected federal government prior to 2008 or even 2006? Republicans clearly had sore winners syndrome, starting when they became the majority in congress and expanded it when Bush became president. Their attitude was clearly “screw you” in everything they did. Even when there was a chance for any kind of dissent, that was was thwarted at every opportunity (ie, the out-of-session appointment of John Bolton to the UN).
President Obama started right of the bat attempting to work with and engage Republicans in congress. What did they do? They became sore losers big time, as indicated by their rousing no vote on the stimulus package. Republicans lost elections the last few times around, because they didn’t want to change their policies to reflect what the people of the country wanted (remember, the voting citizens of this country?) That article reads as if the people of this country should follow a party, not the other way around.
So, maybe if you come with ideas that people want to hear the next time ’round, then perhaps things will be different next election.
Comment by Kevin — July 20, 2009 @ 8:18 pm - July 20, 2009
I just saw part of Chairman Obama’s speech about indefinite detention of terrorists. It was a video of Madcow pointing out how Obama attacked Bush for “ad hoc” laws (or whatever it was) while at the same time, proposing to continue Bush’s policy. It was interesting to see Obama trashing Bush and then announcing he was going to do the same thing, only different.
He had to preface his policy announcement with an attack on Bush, make it sound like it actually isn’t the same thing just so his supporters would love him for it. If I were a liberal, I’d be pissed that Obama didn’t think I was smart enough to figure that out. But then If I were a liberal, I guess I wouldn’t be smart enough.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 20, 2009 @ 8:21 pm - July 20, 2009
#6 – “Republicans clearly had sore winners syndrome, starting when they became the majority in congress and expanded it when Bush became president.”
Oh, really? And I suppose that Chairman SnObama’s retort that “we won” was tit-for-tat?
Need I remind you, Kevvie, that all Dhimmicrats had it in for GWB ever since 2000, calling him “unelected,” “SCOTUS-appointed” and “illegitimate” until the 2004 election?
Try again.
Regards,
Peter H.
Comment by Peter Hughes — July 20, 2009 @ 8:26 pm - July 20, 2009
Even when there was a chance for any kind of dissent, that was was thwarted at every opportunity (ie, the out-of-session appointment of John Bolton to the UN).
So Republican Presidents should just bend over and grab their ankles while the liberals block all his appointments? Got it.
President Obama started right of the bat attempting to work with and engage Republicans in congress.
No he didn’t.
as indicated by their rousing no vote on the stimulus package.
And history has shown that was the right thing to do. The liberals rammed it through without ANYONE having any idea what was in it. Chairman Obama promised that we HAD to pass it NOW and that it would immediately start stimulating the economy and saving millions of jobs. Didn’t happen. Now they’re spending millions on ham and cheese.
Republicans lost elections the last few times around, because they didn’t want to change their policies to reflect what the people of the country wanted (remember, the voting citizens of this country?)
And the people of this country are telling that jerk that we don’t want his Socialist health care. What does he tell us? “F*CK YOU!We’re gonna ram it through this year come hell or high water.”
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 20, 2009 @ 8:28 pm - July 20, 2009
In my experience, part of the leftist’s meanness is linked to his idealism and reality’s inability to fulfill his utopian urges. He cannot accept consequences and responsibilities and sees unfairness everywhere; he knows deep down that his attempts at redress will never work, but his need for approval will never let him cease trying. And that’s only the good liberal.
Comment by Ignatius — July 20, 2009 @ 9:15 pm - July 20, 2009
I think the converse is true, mean people become leftists because on the left, it’s socially acceptable to hate.
Comment by V the K — July 20, 2009 @ 9:17 pm - July 20, 2009
I think authoritarians are nasty, whether right-wing or left-wing. Hitler is just as bad as Pol Pot. You have people who build their identity on their relationship to a group. They have to defend that group in order to maintain their identity. Rosie O’Donnell is just as nasty as James Dobson. What we need are people who are able to tolerate ambiguity. We need to have people who feel strongly about their beliefs but can see how other people can have different beliefs. We don’t need relativists who have no beliefs–but people with strongly held beliefs who are secure enough in their identity to allow other people to have different beliefs, even if they truly think those beliefs are wrong.
Look at the current situation in the Episcopal Church for examples.
Comment by Ashpenaz — July 20, 2009 @ 9:34 pm - July 20, 2009
Submitted for your consideration.
This attitude of persistent crisis is wearing thin. There is no health care crisis in America. There are problems with the cost of health care and with people having access to health care without having to pay for it; but no “crisis” unless the meaning of that word has been dumbed down horribly. For most Americans, the system works fairly well; the challenge is in taking care of the outliers, not throwing out the whole system in favor of a model whose known shortcomings will only raise the cost and diminish the quality of the current system.
Comment by V the K — July 20, 2009 @ 9:45 pm - July 20, 2009
BTW, has anyone noticed that no matter what the “crisis” is – financial, medical, or environmental – the Democrat left solution is always the same: Destroy Capitalism.
Comment by V the K — July 20, 2009 @ 9:55 pm - July 20, 2009
The left is telling this lie that Obamateleprompter wanted to be bi partisian, he had conversations with Republicans……
but then chose to not use ONE of their ideas or suggestions. In either the pork stimulus bill or the crap and trade bill. So hey, take all the blame for a tanking ecomomy. Obama said he WON. How’s that working out for ya? Now his approval is plummiting and their are few leftists or liberals with their heads up supporting the President. We in this blog hated the spending spree the Republicans were on in the early 2000’s . One of the few things that could bring the Republicans back from the dead was a Jimmy Carter Democrat. Thanks. Boobs, dummies, morons and crooks.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 20, 2009 @ 10:01 pm - July 20, 2009
And like the pork stimulus bill, Obama wants it rushed thru in the dead of night, before monday!!!! hehe Let’s see if his Democrats learned from the bail out and pork bills. One more rushed debacle and his Democrat crooked party may abandon him totally.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 20, 2009 @ 10:03 pm - July 20, 2009
ILC, I think one of the big reasons for the vote in 2008 being the way it was, was 8 years of intense rabid hatred of Bush by our elites and the media.
Everything they blamed on the Republicans back in the day is coming true now. Our economy sucks, Europe doesn’t like us very much and we are losing the upper hand with the islamofascists.
So when people saw a well spoken black guy who only knew how to spout Hope and Change. They jumped on the opportunity to have anything but Bush. We are paying the price for that revulsion, I’m just hoping that our country isn’t destroyed in the process.
Comment by Leah — July 21, 2009 @ 1:10 am - July 21, 2009
Kevin, please provide specific examples of President Bush blaming Democrats after he was reelected in 2004 and enjoyed Republican majorities in Congress.
Once you’ve done that, please provide examples of specific compromises Obama made to win Republican support on certain legislative initiatives. It was nice that he made the journey to Capitol Hill to meet with Republicans, but did he act in response to suggestions they offered?
And actually, if you’d paid any attention to Republican policies of the last eight years, you’d see that they did change their policies, shifting to the left in order to win the middle. As a result, they lost their base and antagonized those in the middle who favored smaller government.
You’re right, the GOP does need come up with ides the people want to hear. And the American people do seem to like the sound of opposition to Obama’s big-spending initiatives.
Now, once you’ve provided the examples I’ve requested above, please address the point of the post–on why your guys must repeatedly attack my guys. Ok, so what if you’re right that my side is acting like sore losers? They don’t have any power and can’t block the majority’s legislative initiatives.
So, why do you feel the need to attack them as you do? Your attacks on Republicans don’t address the point of the post, they just help make it.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — July 21, 2009 @ 2:27 am - July 21, 2009
#6: “President Obama started right of the bat attempting to work with and engage Republicans in congress. What did they do? They became sore losers big time, as indicated by their rousing no vote on the stimulus package.”
Give it up, Kevin. You can’t re-write history here. In order to get bi-partisan support for the bills Congress is passing, it could start by not completely shutting Republicans out of the meetings where the final versions of the bills are negotiated.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2009/02/gop-shut-out-of.html
Comment by Sean A — July 21, 2009 @ 2:42 am - July 21, 2009
I second the request for specific examples from the Kevin. I know we won’t see them as he’s one of our regular JAFOs.
Republicans clearly had sore winners syndrome, starting when they became the majority in congress and expanded it when Bush became president. Their attitude was clearly “screw you” in everything they did.
Let’s pretend for a moment that that statement is even remotely true. Is it therefore your contention that people shouldn’t expect better from the liberals?????
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 21, 2009 @ 5:28 am - July 21, 2009
TGC, I haven’t given you props in awhile. Great question. You rock!
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 21, 2009 @ 9:11 am - July 21, 2009
>It would be interesting to look at the actual scorpion: Karl Rove.
Attacking the strengths of opponents, and an uncanny sense for the issues that would inflame voters raised Rove’s stature to an unprecedented level amongst those who hold political influence. Bush created no less than three offices for Karl to occupy during his time in the White House. The blending of policy with politics was nothing new, but had never been done with such precision and effect. *
Rove spent two decades as the main strategist for Republican candidates at all levels in all regions of the country. He built up an impressive record, winning 34 of 41 elections. Karl even lent his savvy advice to clients in Sweden. He holds the strange distinction of being fired from two different George H.W. Bush campaigns. The first time was in 1988, and again in 1992, both times for leaking unsavory information to the press. *
>GWB is not a natural orator and it seemed that he was not far off Rove’s tight leash.
Karl Rove did not transform a dolt into the most powerful man in the world. The direct mail specialist used a combination of instincts and data, then threw in the right wrecking balls at exactly the right times. His political maneuverings were akin to the athletic endeavors of Dennis Rodman. Both were highly valued as teammates and despised as opponents. The problem was that Rove had political friends everywhere, including Al Gore’s campaign manager. Democrats publicly lamented the lack of a Dick Cheney on their team, but were too prideful to do the same for someone who had stung them as much as Rove.
The man who George W. Bush deemed “The Architect” of his campaigns was not afraid of delving into the netherworld of the soul. When Bush was on the ropes during the 2000 primaries, Rove summoned his darkest powers in order to crush the momentum of the high-flying McCain “Straight Talk Express.” Push polls appeared that asked voters in South Carolina if they would vote for McCain if they knew that he had fathered an illegitimate black child. The child was a girl that John and CIndy McCain had adopted from a Mother Teresa orphange in Bangladesh. Stories appeared that Cindy McCain was addicted to prescription drugs, and that John was mentally unstable from his experiences in Vietnam. Bush upended McCain in South Carolina and went on to secure the nomination. *
Bush was never supposed to be the attack dog or the scorpion.
The Dark Vader Cheney and Rove were the ones behind the attacks. Republicans and Democrats were both targets behind Rove’s planned hits. And very few were willing to challenge Cheney.
>The bumper sticker ‘A village in Texas has lost it’s idiot’ comes to mind. ALthough I believe GWB is a good man for he has someone as charming as Laura (and his Daughters) standing by him, he was not the orator Obama.
Rove’s lowest schemes have never borne his fingerprints, but all those who were closely involved either winked or turned blue in the face with the knowledge that Rove was the man behind the curtain. His arsenal of outrageous tricks now seem cliche, but it was Rove who brought political chicanery into the Space Age. *
>Maybe someone should pay look more closely at the ‘man behind the curtain’.
* http://www.examiner.com/x-11800-Bush-Legacy-Examiner~y2009m7d18-Karl-Rove-only-cares-about-winning
Comment by rusty — July 21, 2009 @ 9:12 am - July 21, 2009
That’s a loaded phrase, Ash. It all depends on what you mean by “tolerate” and “ambiguity”. Being able to tolerate cognitive ambiguity is part of the process of discovering the truth, so ‘yes’ to that. OTOH, “you must tolerate moral ambiguity” is one of the canards that hardcore leftists use to browbeat good people into compromising with their poison. F*ck that.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 21, 2009 @ 9:20 am - July 21, 2009
I second that, ILC. When people say that “everything isn’t black and white,” what they fail to appreciate is that everything is not one shade of gray, either.
Comment by V the K — July 21, 2009 @ 10:54 am - July 21, 2009
And even going back to the realm of cognitive ambiguity, V, there should be limits. While one is learning math, one may initially be unsure that 2 + 2 = 4 and may “consider other points of view”. Nonetheless, it is a fact (a part of objective reality) that 2 + 2 = 4, and, once one has fully understood and accepted the reasons, it is wrong to give any credit to proposals that it might be otherwise.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 21, 2009 @ 11:18 am - July 21, 2009
Humm…Interesting Blog. It comes down to “pretentious indignance” that so many on the Left demonstrate year after year. It also has a dash of “egocentric outrage” which helps them “feel good” while requiring them to do nothing. Unfortunately, they are finding out that its much easier to complain about who is driving government then actually being in the driver’s seat. They just cant give up the rhetoric of shifting the blame. Blaming the Republicans is just second nature. Its time for them to demonstrate some responsibility for their ideological failures. Did you see the leader of the Black Chamber of Commerce accuse Barbara Boxer of being “racial.”
Comment by Duffy - Native Intelligence — July 21, 2009 @ 11:18 am - July 21, 2009
Republicans may be out of power or in the minority in most branches of government at the moment, but they have one weapon on their side: their ability to make sound arguments that resonate with the American people. Because they can’t physically silence Republicans, and because they are unable to respond to them with superior arguments, Democrats resort to ad hominem attacks.
Comment by Scott Spiegel — July 21, 2009 @ 12:18 pm - July 21, 2009
I believe leftist meaness began in the 50´s when the ADA hijacked the Democrate Party. The ADA was founded by ex-commies and fellow travelors who felt that the Democrat philosphy of a strong federal government was a vehicle for implementing marxiat socialism. Initially it was considered a pariah, but once they began to get radical leftist elected an endorsement by the ADA became highly desired by candidates willing to vote their agenda. They reached out to disaffected groups, first the blacks, next the college students, who caused campus riots, and joined the peaceniks in the anti-Viet Nam War protests, and the hate America movement was in full bloom. Last came Stonewall. Many gays who were Republicans became Democrats. They claimed our struggle was like the communists struggle in Viet Nam, hence co-opting the term Liberation Front. (GLF). Generations have grown up in an environment of meaness. Considering that some of these mean spirited people are teachers, preachers, and I use the term loosely, journalists; the trend needs to be reversed. The cure is a lot of love and we conservatives should inspire out youth into those professions. We need conservatives to run for school boards, to rid our classrooms of revisionism. Change is effected from the bottom up, not top down, and Barak Obama is proving the point.
Comment by Roberto — July 21, 2009 @ 12:45 pm - July 21, 2009
I heard today that Obamateleprompters poll ratings are now BELOW Jimmy Carter at the same time in his Presidency! Holy Cow how the mighty have fallen. hopenchange nice ideas liberals! Did you think Americans would have buyers remorse so quickly?
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 21, 2009 @ 1:15 pm - July 21, 2009
Obama kills another defense program. I am convinced the Obamacrats just plain hate America.
Comment by V the K — July 21, 2009 @ 1:57 pm - July 21, 2009
Even the state media can no longer deny the plunging Obama polls and approval of his policies. Obama has always been more popular than his ideas. Now the people realize how dumb these boobs really are. Look at the articles and stories in the state run media….
Obama calls Dems to the White House to pressure them on Govt Health Care. No Republicans included….no post partisianship, no bi partisianship? Liar.
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/obama-to-lobby-energy-and-commerce-dems-2009-07-21.html
Obama admits, like his fellow Democrats he hasn’t read the bill either.
Geez….like the pork bill and the bail out bill…
http://www.heritage.org/2009/07/21/morning-bell-obama-admits-hes-not-familiar-with-house-bill/
Oh oh, the Obama administration isn’t so transparent afterall. Liar.
They are delaying a legally mandated report on the economy….news too disturbing, too horrible?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/20/AR2009072002277_pf.html
Now it looks like Obamateleprompter may miss his Club Gitmo deadline as well. Man are these people morons. Can’t wait for a media frenzy about Obama’s first SIX MONTHS!! A+
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/21/gitmo-review-delayed-6-months/
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 21, 2009 @ 2:07 pm - July 21, 2009
Wednesday nite there is yet another Obamateleprompter press conference. For those in the press who might want to ask more probing questions than the usual “Mr President, what’s your favorite color”…..
here are some interesting ones from Hennessey I thought were great:
http://keithhennessey.com/2009/07/21/20-questions/
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — July 21, 2009 @ 5:14 pm - July 21, 2009
[...] against Republicans. Such diatribes are particularly delicious when the reader/commenter attaches his criticism to posts where we fault the Democrats for being mean-spirited. Instead of addresing our points, [...]
Pingback by GayPatriot » How Rove-Hatred Makes My Point about Meanness of Many Leftists — July 21, 2009 @ 8:54 pm - July 21, 2009
They claimed our struggle was like the communists struggle in Viet Nam,
Jeez! Is there anything that the “gay struggle” isn’t like? Why not compare it to Grant’s struggle to circumvent the river batteries of Vicksburg or the Norman struggle against the Anglo-Saxons?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — July 22, 2009 @ 12:43 am - July 22, 2009
TGC
The GLF made that comparison. It´s in the PBS documentary, After Stonewall.
Comment by Roberto — July 22, 2009 @ 12:26 pm - July 22, 2009