Sometimes you read a column by a liberal that seems it was written by a conservative to caricature his ideological adversaries. And when you realize it’s probably legitimate, you wonder at the editors who approve this piece for publication. Are they so contained within their liberal bubble that they’re blind to how narrow their ideological confrère might comes across to someone with a broader perspective?
Such were my thoughts when I chanced upon this Op-Ed in a paper I used to receive every morning on my doorstep. The author writes about a political argument that changed her feelings for neighbors she describes as “the best neighbors in the world. Always ready with a tool, an ingredient or a jump-start for the car. Whatever you need, if they have it, they will give it. They are a lovely family: husband, wife and four smart, funny, polite children. I was sure they were Democrats.”
Already there, we see her prejudice, assuming that nice people must be Democrats.
When while playing poker and drinking with the author and her spouse, the aforementioned husband, a white man married to a black woman announced that that tea party was not racist, indeed, that he was part of that dynamic grassroots movement. The argument became heated. Insults exchanged.
The following morning, the tea party conservative came over with his wife to apologize. His contrition, however, could not soften the hardened heart of his erstwhile hostess:
But my feelings about them are changed. I cannot respect them as I did before. And as they headed back across the street, I saw the look they gave each other: They don’t like us anymore either.
How does she know what that look meant? Well, we do know what she feels. She spells it out pretty clearly
I don’t want to be friends with someone who is a member of the tea party or is a Newt Gingrich Republican. We are not the same. I equate their political views with thoughtlessness, intolerance and narcissism. I think they are not kind or empathetic. And my neighbor made it clear that he does not respect my opinions or me.
Wow. Just wow. Not kind? Not empathetic? Lady, you’ve got evidence of their empathy. They saw fit to go out of their way and apologize. The husband realized that his words might have hurt which suggests he was able to understand the hurt his words could cause.
Oh, and as, to empathy, let me remind this woman — that just because you don’t support government programs to help the needy doesn’t mean you oppose all initiatives to help out the less fortunate, say private charities.
It’s not just this lady’s rant that’s revealing. It’s that the editors of the LA Times saw fit to publish it. No wonder a local blogger calls the paper his Dog Trainer.
NB: LInk was broken. Now fixed.
I had read the same Op-Ed and wondered how this person could be so ignorant to the ways of others. The way she talked of her neighbors, which she admits were always supportive, and then shows such contempt reminds me of Pelosi speaking about AstroTurf. Well, they must have said racial slurs and spit because that’s how tea partiers are! These people live in their castles of delusion and have no real sense of anyone that is not like them. Sad.
At the time I post this, your link to the op-ed is broken.
[Thanks for catching that! Fixed!]
I don’t know what you call that in America, but in Britain we refer to that as six of one, half a dozen of the other. In other words, it seems there’s more than enough hatred and intolerance to go around.
This is the hyper-partisanship you’ve managed to get yourself into, and why the rest of the world thinks you’ve gone off the deep end. Republicans and Democrats seem to be talking at each other rather than to each other, and could barely work together long enough to stop America defaulting on its debts. The rhetoric of each election seems more extreme than the last, 2012 being no exception, and it really seems America is headed somewhere very ugly in a big hurry.
Also, “You’re what’s wrong with this country!”, I think that’s how she knew what the look meant.
Whatever else you can say about the Republican neighbor, at least he didn’t go crying to the LA Times to whine about his neighbor’s political affiliation.
and why the rest of the world thinks you’ve gone off the deep end.
Oh dear, the “rest of the world” is judging us. I’m feeling terrible about that, really.
Yeah, the rest of the world is in great shape. No “hyper-partisanship,” no crushing debts, no rhetoric there, just America. It really seems the rest of the world is headed somewhere very ugly in a big hurry.
What amy doesn’t point out is that this is one side’s account with clear signs of projection.
It’s like when I call Levi out on his lies. I don’t have to generalize. Levi’s shown time and again he’s a bigotted totaltarian who believes that being poor makes one have sex, brown people can’t comprehend democracy, and the constitution is an annoyance.
The TEA Party neighbor needs a copy of Ann Coulter’s How to Talk to a Liberal (If You Must).
And sticking with Coulter, she sums this type of encounter up nicely:
I’m with Evil Otto. “The rest of the world”…mostly just the Crips and the Bloods on a large scale, or if European, having tea on the Titanic. Our moral superiors. Yeah, sure.
Ugh and ugh. Heer is my first question to her, when your neighbor brought up the subject of politics – by mentioning he is tea Party, why didn’t she simply stop it there and say – we clearly disagree on politics – let’s not let it ruin our friendship and go back to talking about things we have in common.
But no, she sought the fight then blamed them of being intolerant – because they disagree with her. The only things she can’t do is call him racist – he’s married to a black woman. He probably also has a close gay relative he loves – but they never got to that.
Oh and one more thing, Tea partiers do the right thing, come over and apologize, but she can see into their hearts and knows they don’t mean it. Of course this is just projection, she can’t forgive them for not being like her – but of course, as my husband always says – another example of the openminded tolerant left.
I’m willing to bet the “evil ” neighbors already knew what the authors political leanings were – she is a writer for the Times of LA after all – but didn’t much care. I’d be willing to bet that they were put off only after this woman became a total cunt at the party. My liberal little brother is the same way. He and his wife (who we lovingly refer to as “Girl Hitler” a character from the Venture Bro’s cartoon because she thinks we never should have gotten involved in WWII) are raving lunatics if you disagree with them on any issue, be it abortion or global warming. It’s not just a disagreement of opinions, it is for them a life or death struggle with obvious idiots and racists because you don’t have the same opinions as they do. Yes, Conservatives can also be very bad in this regard, but hell, not nearly so often and intensely as liberals.
It’s funny. My partner in the duo band Taylor Martin is a Socialist… No, not the socialist lite that many consider Obama to be, but a real card carrying Socialist / Communist. And he’s not quiet about it either. He’s a political hot-head and talks about how evil capitalism is all the time. Yet, we get along just fine.
Why?
Because, at the end of the day, it doesn’t matter what he believes politically. I’m not going to change his mind on much of anything, so I don’t bother to try. I just shake my head in faux agreement and go on with whatever we’re doing. Now, if I was the hothead and went on and on about my views….. There would be no friendship with Jim, i would be less of a guitarist as he’s a fine teacher, and there would be no Taylor Martin.
Why is it soooo hard for people to agree to disagree and move on without taking things so personally?
PS. Sorry for using the “C” word, but I’ve been studying a lot of Police for my tribute band Snchronicity IV, and Sting uses that word in a number of songs. Well, since I’m Sting in the band, I’ve kind of gotten used to the word!
And we’re so very, very amused by that coming from you and yours.
Maybe if you and your fellow “progressives” could demonstrate the ability to act like rational people instead of having screaming temper tantrums in the street where you assault, burn, smash, and loot, you would have credibility on this matter.
I agree. At the risk of being repetitive, let’s have fun once more, in reviewing the lady’s own facts (as one-sided as those are):
1) Bi-racial neighbor couple are super good people. They are super helpful, raise great kids, and go out of their way to apologize if they think they’ve hurt your feelings.
2) Upon receiving information from them that the Tea Party actually isn’t racist, left-wing lady flips out: completely changing her feelings about them and going to the LA Times to vent.
Who’s nasty here?
I suspect there’s a lot more that the lady isn’t telling us. On her own facts, she (and not the Tea Party couple) is nasty. She probably isn’t telling us, for example, that in the “heated” discussion, she was the one to launch all the worst insults.
Wow sf, you don’t even smile and say “Let’s not talk about politics”? You go so far as to have him think you do agree with him? Yikes.
Tried that…. You have to understand Jim. Once he gets going, he can’t stop himself. He knows my political leanings, and they differ from his. I choose not to get into the kerfuffle. The guy just has to vent every so often. Nodding is the best way to let it roll by.
Good, that wasn’t clear.
ILC… you know how you can listen to someone talk at length about something, and you do that thing where, even though you don’t do it physically, you do roll a pair of imaginary eyes in the back of your head? I do that a lot when we’re not playing music and just talking. Thing is, he’s a good guy. he’s seen and been through things that I have not (Vietnam for instance). We simply have differing opinions on things political and economics.
We have an obligation to let others know when we don’t agree with them. It’s only honest. I don’t mean fighting them. I don’t mean going-to-toe. I described at #13 what I do mean. We have an obligation to not give people false impressions (except of course in urgent self-defense, like lying to a criminal who is trying to rob or kill us… which is a rare exception). Helping others live with unreal impressions, does not really help them.
(continued) To bring it back to the LA Times article: the people should have kept it light. You can let someone know, without fighting or in a light way, the basic fact that you and they don’t agree. The people’s mistake was in letting it get nasty. And based on the personal deficiencies evident in the lady’s own account, I suspect it was chiefly (if perhaps not entirely) *her* mistake.
Again, the columnist for the LA Slimes perfectly illustrates Peter’s Principle of Politics #123:
Conservatives like you for WHO you are. Libtards like you for WHAT you are.
Match, set, game.
Regards,
Peter H.
From the article:
I’ve found that this attitude is typical; that some liberals tend to have such high opinions of their opinions to the point that anyone who disagrees is an irrational, illogical idiot and/or a sociopath and is therefore not worthy of respect or tolerance and must be shunned. It also explains why some liberals feel that they don’t have to justify their beliefs, that they are self-evidently right.
Also, her saying “of course we want every baby to be wanted” strikes me as hypocritical given the implication that she is pro-choice.
I also love how she automatically assumes that her conservative neighbor is anti-gay. He very well might be (and perhaps he said something in their argument that suggests that), but it wouldn’t surprise me in the least if that wasn’t the case.
Finally, I just can’t get over how she contradicts herself. First, she says
but she later says
So, even though she knows what these people are like, once she learns of their political views, she starts thinking of them as caricatures, even though she knows that the caricature doesn’t fit them? Just because of their political views? That is what I get from this.
Oh, he probably just married a black woman to hide the fact that he is racist.
“LIberals” aren’t the reason that none of you wimps on this site can show yourselves, no youtube videos, no links to your own pages with your photos.
you’re mad at liberals? it’s not the fault of Liberals that your republican families don’t love you or respect you or accept you.
just keeping you honest. hating liberals won’t change the fact that all of your fathers with they didnt have to call you Son.
you’ll be an embarrassment to him until the day you die. never forget it, losers. Your dads don’t actually love you 🙂
Yay! Little Kiwi is back!
And he is as ignorant as ever, accusing conservatives of hating liberals despite reality being the exact opposite, as clearly indicated by this post.
Serenity 5:47am “I don’t know what you call that in America, but in Britain we refer to that as six of one, half a dozen of the other. In other words, it seems there’s more than enough hatred and intolerance to go around. This is the hyper-partisanship you’ve managed to get yourself into, and why the rest of the world thinks you’ve gone off the deep end.”
A few years ago a British scientist showed up at a party here in the Midwest and proceeded to loudly insult America and anyone who was stupid enough to vote for George Bush or to support Israel or dislike fascist Muslim thugs. Was that the sort of British moderation that you were thinking of?
When I was still a squishy liberal, years ago, my conservative and libertarian friends did not give me any grief. They treated me with respect and kindness. But whenever I expressed even the smallest doubts about any of the numerous liberal orthodoxies my liberal friends treated me to verbal abuse and even shunning. Even today, when I speak with my few remaining liberal friends, no matter how politely I disagree, sticking carefully to facts ideas, I find the responses are often nastily personal. Furthermore, when I am socializing with liberals, although I will avoid politics they will often insist on bringing it up, demanding that I express agreement with them or get an angry argument.
A wise observation, Rattlesnake.
Rattlesnake said:
Which is why when they post whatever “outrage du jour” committed by a Republican on Facebook, they never actually address the topic. An expletive and nasty name suffices.
Most consevatives have respect for the mentally challenged.
(I kid, I kid! Glad to have any intelligent discourse.)
Herp derp.
“Most conservatives have respect for the mentally challenged.”
🙂
A little projection, here; but, I can’t resist.
Neanderthal marries a victim of society and forces her to join in his Neanderthal outlook and turn on her own “kind.” That would be pretty much what stuck in the craw of the liberal who was formally so approving of the “mixed-marriage.”
What, pray tell, makes the least bit of difference to know the race of each of partners in the conservative marriage that caused the liberal to set her own hair on fire?
Who is it that is stuck on the “mixed-marriage” issue?