Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Liberals vs. Imaginary Monsters

Expand Messages
  • Don Divine
    Don Divine WWP Email Member (d3869@sbcglobal.net) Liberals vs. Imaginary Monsters David Harsanyi 13 July 2013 New York Times columnist Paul Krugman recently
    Message 1 of 3 , Jul 12, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Don Divine WWP Email Member (d3869@...) Liberals vs.
      Imaginary Monsters
      David Harsanyi
      13 July 2013
      New York Times
      columnist Paul Krugman recently informed us that a national movement is afoot
      "to punish the unemployed." Remarkably, he went on to write,
      conservatives think the world is far too easy on those who can't find work, so
      they're on a mission to make it worse. The right, you see, is not just
      perpetuating flawed ideas or misguided policies or dumb economics but driven by
      an inexplicable desire to inflict pain on the innocent.
      Now, as it happens, I
      am acquainted with a few conservatives. And though it's hardly a scientific
      sampling, I've yet to hear any of them express a desire to punish the
      unemployed — or minorities or women, for that matter. They may not want to
      offer the unemployed exactly what Krugman might. They may believe, as Krugman
      once did, that promising infinite relief isn't feasible or constructive. But by
      assigning a fiendish objective to a conservative policy, Krugman, as he often
      does, takes a deceitful shortcut to play on your emotions.
      Demonizing your
      political opponents is nothing new, and it's certainly not unique to modern
      liberals, but sometimes it seems as if there isn't any contemporary debate that
      doesn't feature some fabricated moral clash between good and evil.
      You may, for instance,
      be under the impression that anyone who believes immigration laws should be
      enforced — laws that allow thousands of guest workers and a million new
      immigrants into the country every year — is only a fear-stricken nativist. Some
      refuse to accept that anyone could be driven by a genuine anxiety over
      assimilation or a worry about wage depression or a belief that there are
      destructive consequences to offering amnesty to illegal immigrants. For some,
      there can be no other explanation than xenophobia.
      Or take abortion.

      Texas legislator Wendy
      Davis, as most of you have no doubt heard, waged a heroic battle against some
      crusty old white men who have it in for all women — because, evidently, crusty
      old white men in Texas are incapable of being genuinely troubled by the dismemberment
      of nearly viable and viable fetuses. Creating cartoon misogynists is an
      effective way to circumvent any prickly discussions about the moral
      implications of a late-term abortion. It also allows the enlightened to sneer
      at all those hick reactionaries without ever having to confront their
      arguments.
      And when Catholics and
      others who still believe traditional marriage is a public good worth defending
      can't be browbeaten by Twitter hashtag campaigns into abandoning a few thousand
      years of tradition, it can only be chalked up to homophobia. Taking the
      traditional position, a position shared by the progressive president a mere
      year ago, is now tantamount to supporting George Wallace. That was certainly
      quick.
      But does anyone really
      believe it's that simple? Sometimes I wonder. A recent Rasmussen poll found
      that of those who approve of Barack Obama's job performance, just 29 percent
      see radical Muslims as a bigger threat than the tea party. Democrats — if the
      pundit class is any reflection of the general sentiment of voters — have
      convinced themselves that most conservative arguments needn't be confronted
      because they, nearly always, camouflage some uglier sentiment.
      Occasionally, there is
      an uglier underlying sentiment. And plenty of people on the left do confront
      the right's arguments at face value. But too often it isn't the case. As it
      goes, I support immigration reform (in concept), and I believe that government
      should stay out of the business of defining marriage, but surely, how we debate
      those issues matters.
      David Harsanyi is
      editor of Human Events. Follow him on Twitter @davidharsanyi. To find out more
      about David Harsanyi and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and
      cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
       
       





      “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains or slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take but as for me; give me liberty or give me death!”
      --Patrick Henry

      The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

      Thomas Jefferson
    • ShadysLife@...
      Shady Lady WWP Member and Che Guevara groupie (ShadysLife@aol.com) Krugman nailed a perfect 10. Shady Don Divine WWP Email Member (d3869@sbcglobal.net)
      Message 2 of 3 , Jul 13, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Shady Lady WWP Member and Che Guevara groupie (ShadysLife@...) Krugman nailed a perfect 10.
        Shady


        Don Divine WWP Email Member (d3869@...)



        Liberals vs. Imaginary Monsters
        David Harsanyi 13 July 2013
        New York Times columnist Paul Krugman recently informed us that a national
        movement is afoot "to punish the unemployed." Remarkably, he went on to
        write, conservatives think the world is far too easy on those who can't find
        work, so they're on a mission to make it worse. The right, you see, is not
        just perpetuating flawed ideas or misguided policies or dumb economics but
        driven by an inexplicable desire to inflict pain on the innocent.
        Now, as it happens, I am acquainted with a few conservatives. And though
        it's hardly a scientific sampling, I've yet to hear any of them express a
        desire to punish the unemployed — or minorities or women, for that matter.
        They may not want to offer the unemployed exactly what Krugman might. They
        may believe, as Krugman once did, that promising infinite relief isn't
        feasible or constructive. But by assigning a fiendish objective to a conservative
        policy, Krugman, as he often does, takes a deceitful shortcut to play on
        your emotions.
        Demonizing your political opponents is nothing new, and it's certainly not
        unique to modern liberals, but sometimes it seems as if there isn't any
        contemporary debate that doesn't feature some fabricated moral clash between
        good and evil.
        You may, for instance, be under the impression that anyone who believes
        immigration laws should be enforced — laws that allow thousands of guest
        workers and a million new immigrants into the country every year — is only a
        fear-stricken nativist. Some refuse to accept that anyone could be driven by
        a genuine anxiety over assimilation or a worry about wage depression or a
        belief that there are destructive consequences to offering amnesty to
        illegal immigrants. For some, there can be no other explanation than xenophobia.
        Or take abortion.

        Texas legislator Wendy Davis, as most of you have no doubt heard, waged a
        heroic battle against some crusty old white men who have it in for all
        women — because, evidently, crusty old white men in Texas are incapable of
        being genuinely troubled by the dismemberment of nearly viable and viable
        fetuses. Creating cartoon misogynists is an effective way to circumvent any
        prickly discussions about the moral implications of a late-term abortion. It
        also allows the enlightened to sneer at all those hick reactionaries without
        ever having to confront their arguments.
        And when Catholics and others who still believe traditional marriage is a
        public good worth defending can't be browbeaten by Twitter hashtag
        campaigns into abandoning a few thousand years of tradition, it can only be chalked
        up to homophobia. Taking the traditional position, a position shared by
        the progressive president a mere year ago, is now tantamount to supporting
        George Wallace. That was certainly quick.
        But does anyone really believe it's that simple? Sometimes I wonder. A
        recent Rasmussen poll found that of those who approve of Barack Obama's job
        performance, just 29 percent see radical Muslims as a bigger threat than the
        tea party. Democrats — if the pundit class is any reflection of the general
        sentiment of voters — have convinced themselves that most conservative
        arguments needn't be confronted because they, nearly always, camouflage some
        uglier sentiment.
        Occasionally, there is an uglier underlying sentiment. And plenty of
        people on the left do confront the right's arguments at face value. But too
        often it isn't the case. As it goes, I support immigration reform (in concept),
        and I believe that government should stay out of the business of defining
        marriage, but surely, how we debate those issues matters.
        David Harsanyi is editor of Human Events. Follow him on Twitter
        @davidharsanyi. To find out more about David Harsanyi and read features by other
        Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web
        page at www.creators.com.









        “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of
        chains or slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may
        take but as for me; give me liberty or give me death!”

        --Patrick Henry

        The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of
        patriots and tyrants.

        _Thomas Jefferson_ ()
      • Postherguy@...
        Post her Guy aka Geude Carter of Lincoln, Nebraska WWP Email Member (Postherguy@aol.com) Ditto Shady Lady WWP Member and Che Guevara groupie
        Message 3 of 3 , Jul 14, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Post her Guy aka Geude Carter of Lincoln, Nebraska WWP Email Member (Postherguy@...) Ditto

          Shady Lady WWP Member and Che Guevara groupie (ShadysLife@...)
          Krugman nailed a perfect 10.

          Don Divine WWP Email Member (d3869@...) Liberals vs. Imaginary Monsters David Harsanyi 13 July 2013 New York Times columnist Paul Krugman recently informed us that a national movement is afoot "to punish the unemployed." Remarkably, he went on to write, conservatives think the world is far too easy on those who can't find work, so they're on a mission to make it worse. The right, you see, is not just perpetuating flawed ideas or misguided policies or dumb economics but driven by an inexplicable desire to inflict pain on the innocent. Now, as it happens, I am acquainted with a few conservatives. And though it's hardly a scientific sampling, I've yet to hear any of them express a desire to punish the unemployed — or minorities or women, for that matter. They may not want to offer the unemployed exactly what Krugman might. They may believe, as Krugman once did, that promising infinite relief isn't feasible or constructive. But by assigning a fiendish objective to a conservative policy, Krugman, as he often does, takes a deceitful shortcut to play on your emotions. Demonizing your political opponents is nothing new, and it's certainly not unique to modern liberals, but sometimes it seems as if there isn't any contemporary debate that doesn't feature some fabricated moral clash between good and evil.You may, for instance, be under the impression that anyone who believes immigration laws should be enforced — laws that allow thousands of guest
          workers and a million new immigrants into the country every year — is only a
          fear-stricken nativist. Some refuse to accept that anyone could be driven by
          a genuine anxiety over assimilation or a worry about wage depression or a
          belief that there are destructive consequences to offering amnesty to
          illegal immigrants. For some, there can be no other explanation than xenophobia.
          Or take abortion.

          Texas legislator Wendy Davis, as most of you have no doubt heard, waged a
          heroic battle against some crusty old white men who have it in for all
          women — because, evidently, crusty old white men in Texas are incapable of
          being genuinely troubled by the dismemberment of nearly viable and viable
          fetuses. Creating cartoon misogynists is an effective way to circumvent any
          prickly discussions about the moral implications of a late-term abortion. It
          also allows the enlightened to sneer at all those hick reactionaries without
          ever having to confront their arguments.
          And when Catholics and others who still believe traditional marriage is a
          public good worth defending can't be browbeaten by Twitter hashtag
          campaigns into abandoning a few thousand years of tradition, it can only be chalked
          up to homophobia. Taking the traditional position, a position shared by
          the progressive president a mere year ago, is now tantamount to supporting
          George Wallace. That was certainly quick.
          But does anyone really believe it's that simple? Sometimes I wonder. A
          recent Rasmussen poll found that of those who approve of Barack Obama's job
          performance, just 29 percent see radical Muslims as a bigger threat than the
          tea party. Democrats — if the pundit class is any reflection of the general
          sentiment of voters — have convinced themselves that most conservative
          arguments needn't be confronted because they, nearly always, camouflage some
          uglier sentiment.
          Occasionally, there is an uglier underlying sentiment. And plenty of
          people on the left do confront the right's arguments at face value. But too
          often it isn't the case. As it goes, I support immigration reform (in concept),
          and I believe that government should stay out of the business of defining
          marriage, but surely, how we debate those issues matters.
          David Harsanyi is editor of Human Events. Follow him on Twitter
          @davidharsanyi. To find out more about David Harsanyi and read features by other
          Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web
          page at www.creators.com.









          “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of
          chains or slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may
          take but as for me; give me liberty or give me death!”

          --Patrick Henry

          The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of
          patriots and tyrants.

          _Thomas Jefferson_ ()
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.