Four Reasons I Find the Left Repellent
Reason 1: Weineraquiddick
Not just Weiner’s lying, bullying, threatening, self-pity on full display here:
After all, it’s to be expected that a disgusting cad will lie right up until the moment the evidence against him is so overwhelming that he “comes clean” because he is insulting his audience’s intelligence. That’s what liars do: They lie.
No, what’s really disgusting about the Left is not Weiner, disgusting as he is. It is sickening shills like Chris Matthews, who has no burning panic-driven need to cover his sociopathic narcissism in order to keep his job or his marriage, yet who coolly and with deliberation, tries to figure out a way to blame Weiner’s wife for his disgusting betrayal:
What mystifies me is why any sane feminist would want to support creeps like Clinton and Weiner or have their ideas formed by a swine like Matthews. Of course, the GOP is no great shakes in this department either, what with the grotesque Newt Gingrich excusing his piggish treatment of his wives with the excuse that he just loved America so darn much. But then, as far as I can tell, nobody on the Right greeted Gingrich’s grotesque mea culpa with anything but a sense of imminent projectile nausea, and nobody in the media said of Gingrich’s repellent actions, “Maybe his wife had it coming.” But the Left can generally find somebody in the Media who will try to provide air cover for such sick-making stuff as they did in legions during Monicaquiddick and for Kennedy after Kennedy.
I wonder if Matthews will find some way to spit on Elizabeth Edwards’ grave, too. Here she is with a message for yet another man of the Left who once bid fair to run the lives of families across the US.
Reason 2: Demagogues who don’t know what “literally” means:
Again, I hold no brief for the GOP. But claiming that Republicans want to bring back Jim Crow is vile demagoguery. Special bonus points for the fact that the woman who succeeded this illiterate demagogue has directly profited from the slaughter of babies and is an archetype of everything that is most revolting about the Left’s commitment to baby-killing.
Reason 3: Thomas Friedman’s Dimestore Malthusianism, in which yet another rich white guy tells the poor, dark and almond-eyed, “Just enough of me. Way too much of you.” In his own way, he is a kindred spirit to Ayn Rand in that both are saying, in essence, “I’ve got mine. If the poor be like to die, they had better do it and decrease the surplus population.”
Reason 4: The Leftist Love of Violence.
Some of you may remember way back in January, when Sarah Palin (of whom I am no big fan but who is routinely maligned in grossly unfair ways) was grotesquely defamed as somehow an accessory to the attempted murder of Congressman Giffords because she’d sent out this little graphic during the elections:
Oh! Wait! I’m sorry! That’s a Democrat map targeting Republicans! Silly me!
Anyway, she sent out something pretty similar (as pols have done since the Pleistocene) and was promptly denounced as Lee Harvey Oswald in a skirt by demagogues of the Left. It was the most vile attempt to exploit tragedy for political gain since the equally vile Wellstone funeral rally, only it didn’t even have the fig leaf of saying that “Wellstone would have wanted it this way.” But for nine days or so, we were all hectored by the Left on the “violence” of putting like targets on maps and the sheer murderous evilness of Sarah Palin for her use of this hoary convention.
These days, however, there is stony silence from the Left about this:
“You know what man? I am going to literally — if she gets elected president, I am going to hang out on the grassy knoll all the time, just loaded and ready — because you know what? It’s for my country. It’s for my country. If I got to sacrifice myself, it’s for my country,”—comedian/actor Christopher Titus.
Occasionally, I have people suggest that, because I no longer consider myself a part of the Thing that Used to be Conservatism, that means I consider myself a Lefty. My reply is no: I consider myself a Catholic. The Thing that Used to be Liberalism is, like the kingdom of Israel in the Old Testament, in a state of catastrophic decline since its definitive break with God and embrace of baby murder. The Thing that Used to Be Conservatism is like the Kingdom of Judah, in somewhat slower but rapidly accelerating decline. Exhibit A: The repellent spectacle of The Polygamous Planned Parenthood Promoter Donald getting all righteous about Weiner.
That this man was ever considered for one second as a “conservative” (and that a right wing pop star like Sarah Palin saw fit to engage in a session of mutual narcissism with him while her adoring “conservative” fans cheered for them both) is all the indictment of the Thing That Used to be Conservatism one needs.
But rejecting the evils which the Thing that Used to Be Conservatism is coming to embrace does not mean embracing the evils that the Thing that Used to Be Liberalism has been championing for decades. It means returning to the Tradition and rejecting twaddle and sin as best one can, whoever is pushing it, while trying to preserve, as best one can, the fragments of Catholic teaching that still remain in both debased political movements in the hope that someday, people will wise up, reject the garbage our demented system offers us and save, like Robinson Crusoe, those fragments of Catholic teaching still honored in both parties from the shipwreck our political culture has made of itself. May God speed the day.