The American Spectator

Reader Mail

Huffington Puffington

6.26.08 @ 12:01AM

(Page 2 of 3)

The liberal message is nearly impossible in our society to avoid. It permeates media, news, entertainment, advertising and education. One has to work to get the conservative message. And yet, conservatives are proud to be called "conservative" and liberals don't want to be called "liberal." Can someone explain why only certain people believe and follow liberals like Arianna?
-- Paul Hoffmann
San Antonio, Texas

The more I come into contact with screeds like those found on the " Daily Kos" and " The Huffington Post" the more I think back to a few deep conversations I had with my father. He was an English major in college and wanted nothing more than to teach drama and theater at our local community college, but under New York State law that meant having to have a Master's degree to be eligible. So starting in 1963 he began working on that degree at SUNY Fredonia, the closest university that could grant such a degree.

Things went well for about three years and he had amassed about 27 of the 30 hours required and was in the process of working on his thesis when called in to see the dean of the English department and his advisor. Since he was doing high B work, he didn't realize that this was not a counseling session but a dismissal. They did not like the fact he did not " think" the " right way" and told him under no circumstances would they ever let him get a degree from that university. Of course, any complaint would be his word versus theirs -- i.e., a " you lose" situation. After that he dropped out of the program.

He and I had several long " after action" talks about this (later I ran into a similar problem at Purdue with their English department and left in January 1968). His view was that it was a clash between objective thinking and subjective thinking, and if you held an objective point of view you could see -- albeit rarely accept due to the fallacy of the thought involved -- the subjective view, whereas a subjective thinker could not grasp your point at all and tended to belittle you for not seeing " the bigger picture."

He was a victim of such subjective thinkers who would not accept his objective views of English and the subjects covered, even though the teachers and professors did for the most part. I hit that same brick wall with an advanced English professor at Purdue who (after I made the mistake of exposing his shallow knowledge and poor grasp of even subjective points of view) ensured that I could not pass his course under any circumstances. I wrote it off to being a victim of what I called " J.B.'s Theory" after my father.

Fast forward. Today it seems we have four basic types of personalities in politics (and life) -- call them subjective liberal, objective liberal, objective conservative, and subjective conservative.

Subjective liberal is unfortunately the dominant form found on the left of center. These people believe their own myths and propaganda, and take too much time trying to either empathize with others or see things from their point of view to grasp reason. You either see things from their very narrow (and ill founded) point of view or you are a (fill in your favorite epithet for the person who does not conform) of the lowest form of life, or " in lockstep" with others of such non-sentient forms of life.

Barack Obama is one of the flagship personalities for this sort of thinking, and those who post at the two main web sites noted above are true believers in this point of view and way of life. You either are a true believer or a fool in their eyes. They will tell you what is a topic for discussion and what is not; disagree and you are purged from the body, never to return. They will tell you what is correct and what is not; disagree and you are branded with an epithet.

An objective liberal is what used to be a Democrat. They were more attuned to social ills and improving the life of the little guy, but could see threats and dangers as threats and danger and not missed opportunities for communication and shared views. Joe Lieberman is probably one of the last serious objective liberals in Congress.

The objective conservative is what most of us who deem ourselves as conservatives are today, and Reagan was undoubtedly the best example. (Note how relatively easy it is to move from being an objective liberal to being an objective conservative, as he did.) Right is right, wrong is wrong, and there is no such thing as 6400 shades of gray in between. The sad thing is that the objective conservative is far more open, egalitarian, tolerant and willing to hear others' actual points of view than any others except the objective liberal. But as there are differing levels inside the basic framework based on life experience, location, livelihood and other factors, getting all objective conservatives to agree is literally like herding cats.

The subjective conservative is in the minority, as they tend towards the paranoid. Nazis and Communists in the flesh -- not theory -- personify this point of view and as such can be extremely dangerous. These also are those who hide under their kitchen table with tinfoil hats so the black helicopters from the UN cannot trace their brainwaves and pollute their precious bodily fluids. Some could argue the more vitriolic on the right of center, such as Pat Buchanan, could be borderline subjective conservatives.

The sad thing is that the subjective liberals took over first education, then the media, and now are working on taking over the government at every level. They have nearly succeeded in Maryland with what is essentially one-party government (and one which successfully used the gerrymander and demonization of their opponents to ensure that it stayed that way) off into its own subjective world. There is no problem with illegal aliens; they are culturally misunderstood new Marylanders and as such CASA and La Raza need state help getting them under the umbrella of state programs. There is no problem with state government corruption; it's just " lockstep" clones of George Bush out to carry out political witch-hunts. There is no problem with education in Maryland that cannot be fixed with more money being given to the schools. If a Republican fires political appointees to replace them with his own political appointees, this is a crime that must be investigated to see if their rights were violated. If a Democrat governor fires political appointees to replace them with his own political appointees, then this is " right sizing" government with fresh ideas and new faces to improve things (and the other ones were probably crooked anyway). You get the idea.

I fear that we may be in for worse if the subjective liberals get full control of the government. Nancy Pelosi's threat to renew the " Fairness Doctrine" is a perfect subjective liberal maneuver to still the voices of anyone who disagrees with them. All that does is replace any of the more rational courses of discussion and information with screed-heavy diatribes from the " Huffington Post."
-- Cookie Sewell
Maryland

Liberal ideology revolves around two concepts: symbolism trumping substance and feelings trumping logic. Why do point-counterpoint arguments with liberals inevitably result in anger and name-calling? They can't imagine how anyone could challenge their selfless virtue and utopian ambitions.
-- Arnold Ahlert
Boca Raton, Florida

Wow, looks like the "lunatic right" taught the "lunatic left" well! Invective, intolerance, and stretching the truth apply to both sides of the political aisle in America.
-- Carlyn Meyer

Letter to the Editor

topics:
Education, John McCain, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Bill Clinton, Earmarks, Environment, Law, Military, Conservatism, Energy, Alaska, Oil